Important? Says who?

The concept of the agenda-setting theory is a familiar one. As a communication major, although I have no interest in being a journalist, I have heard many times before what the "duty" of a journalist is. I've heard from people who aspire to go into journalism that they wish to 'report the truth, unbiased.' But we all know this isn't true... or at least the case these days. In Chapter 28, McCombs and Shaw developed the agenda-setting hypothesis, believing that "mass media have the ability to transfer the salience of issues on their news agenda to the public agenda." (p. 359). Everyone would like to think that they are independent thinkers... and for the most part, most of us are-- however the news cues us on where to focus our attention. The quote that I find true is: "We judge as important was the media judge as important" (p. 359). And that is evident by the news channels we watch. Stories are quick and run 15 seconds or so, anything that run 30-45 seconds you know has a little bit more significance based on its length and frequency it appears in the media. It hard to tell whether agenda-setting is more of a positive or negative thing, but I suppose it has both aspects. It's a matter of whose agenda is imposed upon the audience, I find myself always thinking, 'who is this coming from?'

But I think the best thing for us to do is take our information and facts from various sources in order to establish our own "truth" and what's important.