Yeah we’re back to the blog post again and this time we’re going to talk about the issue, does it matter who owns the media, government or private company.
A sharing in every post so that this won’t be so boring. Recently in Malaysia, the triple spicy Mc Chicken is smokin’ hot. If you guys haven’t even try the original Mc Chicken, I strongly recommend you guys to have a taste of it. Yeah I want to try the spicy one too but too bad I’m a little bit allergy to spicy food, yet I’ll still try it if I have that chance. Those who like spicy food can come and have a taste cuz many people said that this is a completely different level of spicy compare to the others.
Ok let’s get back to the topic. As we know, media consists a large range including newspapers, radio stations, television shows and so on. We are completely surrounded by them as this is an era of information burst, so who owns the media really does matter as they have the highest potential to affect and lead the audience to a particular thinking. Many people may claim that they have critical thinkings and won’t get easily affected, but don’t ever look down on what media can actually do. Take an example, you think that the education system in a particular nation is good, but if the newspapers are giving bad comments, tv shows keep saying it should be changed, people around you keep focusing and discussing this, won’t you start to question yourself whether it is good or not? The effects of media is not instantly, it comes slowly and gradually depends on how much we are exposed in that.
I’ll introduce both of the media first. Government owned media, the media for mass communication that is largely or completely controlled by the state. The contents of the news produced will more or less, support the government in terms of its content compared to the private owned media. For them it’s an effective way to increase the loyalty of the people towards the government. However, state media is not driven by individual interest, rather, it has the country’s interests at heart. Some of the examples are Singapore, South Korea and so on. In these countries, issues that threatens the racial and religious harmony is strictly prohibited and necessary legal actions may be taken if necessary.
The next is private owned media, which information can be obtained by different companies legally. Freedom of speech and democracy is promoted in, different point of views and conflict between the news is common in there. Unlike government own media, finance of each media outlet is provided by individuals or private groups. Due to this private ownership, the financiers of the private media have the right to dictate and choose what is broadcast through it. Norway is one of the examples of this type of media, it’s the first place in the world freedom press index and it’s free of censorship. One of the media outlet in there is Verdens Gang (VG), the online newspaper that is produced by them is popular among the Norwegians.
In my point of view, government owned media is better. Although its content might not as objective and fair compared to the private owned media sometimes, I believe that the government do so not for them but for their country. I’ve read through an article before that claims absolute honesty is actually bad for almost everything, sometimes we need lies as lubricant so that most of the things are flexible, it is considered reasonable for the government to control the media as long as the government can ensure the that the country is well.
That’s all for my blog post today and thank you for your reading. Hope you guys to have a nice day and now I’m going to grab a bite in McDonalds.
TY's blog 
Hi Tian Yi! I like that you provided example to explain how people nowadays are so reliant and easily influence by the media. I do feel that government owned media is better too as contents publish are more restricted so as to decrease possibility of disputes and misunderstandings. Have you wonder what if the government censored certain ‘unglam’ information about the country to protect her reputation? There is also possibility that the government can censor content that they do not want the citizens to know. Would you rather live a life filled with lies or would you rather know the truth? Well I would prefer knowing the truth as compared to being lied by the government. Yes, lies act like a lubricant to ensure things go on more flexible but I feel that is the easy way out and I believe government should not go onto this path. This are just my personal opinions. I did enjoy reading your blog and also listening to your presentation, it was quite funny. 😊
讚Liked by 2 people
Hi Tian Yi,
First, I would like to congratulate your team and you for the presentation, really enjoyed how you used your childhood example and related it to the topic! I also like how you started of your 4th blog post with an interesting topic about Malaysia’s spicy McChicken. HAHA, would love to go try it, but sadly we have school and loads of assignment! Will let you know how it taste like, if I ever get the chance to try it okay! 😀
Okay now back to our main content, I agree with your example on the education system. It doesn’t take long for media to spread a news whether real or fake, but people start talking and word spreads faster than lightning! As such, yes, media is the primary form of source that gets news to people.
I also agree with your opinion on sticking to having government owned media in Singapore. Like what you mentioned, we need lies to lubricate the truth so that chaos don’t break out. This is true, because there was a recent outburst about the ‘brownface’ ad going on. And when a particular YouTuber did a response video for it, all hell broke loose! The government took some kind of action against her as they felt her video violated certain rules and guidelines of media. Matter of fact, the YouTuber was just voicing out her opinions of why the ad had to use a Chinese individual to ‘imitate’ the minority race and why didn’t they use real Malay and Indian talents to be featured on the ad.
So, when one YouTube video triggered so much chaos, just wonder what will happen if we saw similar videos of individuals voicing out their opinions in our MediaCorp channels. We can definitely expect a racial war all around Singapore! As such, it is true that we need government to control what is shown in our media in order to maintain peace and harmony in our nation.
To end off, your blog post was really informative and detailed about the topic. Keep up the good effort and see you around in class! 😀
Cheers,
Nandhini 🙂
讚Liked by 1 person
Hi Tian Yi!
Before I get into it, just wanted to say that I loved your presentation, you were hilarious HAHA
So we have the same stance that government-owned media is better, however, I really think the point you’ve brought up is pretty interesting. I do agree that some people really just cannot handle the harsh truth, although that wasn’t in my own reasoning. I guess the government has no choice but to try to be a little more flexible in that sense and compromise between giving the whole truth and a bunch of lies. I do agree that as long as the country is doing well it doesn’t really matter that much anyway, most people have access to everything online nowadays so even if they’re upset about censorship there’re always ways around it.
See you in class! (:
讚Liked by 1 person
Hello, Tian Yi!
I really like how you made clear of your stand i.e. that media ownership is important since the start of your discussion. Your discussion on the impact of media on the perception or thinking of people is also really interesting and insightful. I strongly agree with you that it definitely can impact our way of thinking very easily despite trying our best to think critically on media messages.
If I were to choose on which ownership is important, and if a country was to only have 1 kind of ownership, I would have to say private owned media is better simply because for the freedom of speech. This way, their concerns will be heard and not neglected. However, I strongly believe that there should be both government and private owned media ownership in a state so as to balance the pros and cons as well as provide choice for which media people want to engage in.
That being said, I really like your post! You have made your points very clear! :)))
讚Liked by 1 person
Hey there TY! First and foremost, thank you for recommending the Triple Spicy McChicken! Personally, I prefer Malaysia’s McDonald’s than Singapore’s. I was at first doubtful that there’d be any difference between the two but I was proven wrong. The moment I tried Ayam Goreng McD, I knew I was missing out all this time! Before I get carried away and develop a craving for Malaysia’s McD, I just want to say that I enjoyed reading your post. I share the same thought pertaining to the government ownership of media. Although it might not be the best form of media ownership and control, I’ve always believed that the government has the best intentions of the country under their charge. See you in class yeah!
– Syafiq
讚Liked by 1 person