How does Mass Media affect people in society? Essay

So far, therere various media for people to choose and gravel the information such as television, radio, Internet, or even mobile phone, consequently, media have a full capacity to set a social subject for jam audience to think and talk about. Often, media do not deliberately set the agenda and determine the pros and cons of that particular issue, so it repeatedly causes bad consequences towards public as well as establishes moral panics, which can sometimes lead to mob violence.The studies point that there is a correlation between violence on media and unpeaceful behavior. The reason that violent programs go well on the global commercialize is violent imagery on television gets high ratings therefore, producers are forced onto market to make a profit. But more significantly, television has taken the place of other forms of communication that at one time tied us in concert in families and communities, and gave us all the opportunity to participate in creating and passing along ou r cultural story.Since mass media as crucial vehicles to influence public opinion, the administration is likely to control and dominate the press and broadcasting. There was a wide range of restrictions on reporting and in many countries in the region at the time, we had a number of politicss that were authoritarian governments that used press control as one of their political tools. Indonesia, China, Malaysia, Vietnam, Cambodia, Burma, Laos, just to name a few all had restrictions on their own domestic media, restrictions on foreign journalists working within those countries, and restrictions on what news could be sent out.As example in Malaysia, during the government of kick Minister Mahathir Mohamad, authorities controlled all major themes and broadcast outlets, ensuring a substantial degree of official influence over news published in the countrified. The yet exception was the Internet, which had so far remained censorship-free. Additionally, under Malaysian law, authoriti es are required to screen foreign publications prior to their distribution in the country. For instance, Malaysian government blocked the distribution of some U.S. newsmagazines in 2002, apparently because the government considered some stories inaccurate and untrue, including reports on alleged links between the al-Qaeda terrorist network and groups in Malaysia.On the other side, Thailand, as the democratic society, is still in the criticism about the current Prime minister, Dr. Thaksin Shinawatra, regarding his policies and style of leadership whether theyre against the constitution and trusty moral or not particularly War on Drugs policy. Furthermore, many people mentioned that he attempted to cover his critics by taking control of the countrys independent television station since 23 ITV staffs dismissed due to they damaged the stations reputation by openly criticizing the stations buyout by the Prime Minister. Not very long, the press violently reacted and declared that he was as dictator. Even more serious, some journalists believed that they were exposed to serious reprisals when they dampen the corruption of local authorities. Although Dr. Thaksin sharply uses media effect to structure individuals thinking and increase efficiency of mass communication for the government, his propaganda shouldnt be contrary to the legal constrains in terms of the right of expression.Media play an important role as a showcase that reveals trait of a certain area through outsiders. Obviously, when the press emphasizes on any topic and criticize people would be instantly interested in and rapidly spreading out till sometimes hardly head with it. In conclusion, mass communication can affect cognitive change among individuals, mentally order and organize the world for us and also simply make believe conflict or violence among people in society. Therefore, authorities or interest groups who extremely control on media especially the government, television program producers a nd newspaper need a proper consideration for media use as well as being responsible for consequences.