As class discussions and required readings continue in this class, I am continually drawn back to the significance of media portrayal in 1968. Much of the protest, violence, and conflict at the time was framed in such a way that had a substantial impact on the American population’s view towards these issues. For example, in reading the book Voices of the Chicago Eight, it became clear early on that the defendants wanted to use their platform of a trial that garnered huge media attention as a stage to voice their opinions on the issues of the time. This is one example but throughout 68, the coverage of media was pivotal in the attempt to create meaningful change. A speech or a protest didn’t mean much if that message did not have the ability to reach a wide amount of people. This made events that would have that ability to reach people so much more important because those involved knew that this was their opportunity to send a message out on a huge scale.
Nowadays, the issue of getting your message out to a big population is no longer the problem. Anybody can send a tweet or post something online that massive amounts of people will be able to see immediately. I believe the new challenge that our generation faces is sifting through that avalanche of information and interpret how all of that functions together. We all know that you can’t believe everything that you hear or see on the Internet, which makes it difficult when you’re trying to acquire knowledge of a topic. It can also make it difficult when you were trying to convey a message over the Internet because your story can be warped and spit back in so many different ways that the original message becomes obsolete. The trick nowadays is more about finding and distributing quality information, as opposed to 68, where simply trying to get your message out was the challenge.
Though the challenges of both generations differ, the general idea stays the same – media portrayal to the population holds extreme value. It does not matter if you are doing the righteous act in the whole world, if you’re not getting media attention or if it’s not the right kind of attention then the message you were trying to send is not going to come across clearly. It’s interesting to observe how details may change over time, but fundamental ideas such as this continue to hold their value from decade to decade.
I think that your comparison of how political messages are disseminated is incredibly insightful. I think you make some great points about just how easy it is now to create a movement as we now all have the tools in our hands to create increasingly informative as well as nationally and internationally recognized campaigns. I believe that you also make a great point about the consequences of everyone having that ability in their hands and the fact that we are all now forced to sift through that information in order to determine what is truth and what is manufactured.
I think you bring up a really interesting point about the spread of information in 1968 versus the spread of information in today’s world. While people were still able to express their opinions through media such as posters, one can’t deny the ease of expressing your opinion in today’s world. Also, news media is as influential now as it has ever been, which is interesting given the supposed “freedom” brought about by the technological revolution in which we live. In my opinion, people in general are just as reliant on the opinions of news pundits and politicians as they have ever been. But I do think you make a good point that it is far easier to dispel a message today than it was in 1968.