The media is, in essence, an economic institution, albeit a large one. To understand the media, we must analyze it from an economist's perspective. Media companies, like any other, are formed and maneuvered to maximize profit, not to benefit society. What they choose to bring to the market by airing on t.v. (SUPPLY) is what we as a people want (DEMAND). While we can be angry that the media focuses on the "gloom and doom," we have only ourselves to blame, for we, as a society, will watch the dramatic and frightening, which will make the media MORE MONEY.
This demand stems from what novelist Joseph Conrad referred to as the "fascination of the abomination," which stated simply that humanity has an inherent, morbid curiosity. Though, as an enlightened individual, you believe this is disgusting, it applies very accurately to society as a whole.
Let's look at some examples that portray the evils that these concepts bring about. Number one? Terrorism. Like it's namesake, terrorism is not about purely killing, but inspiring fear, and nothing does that better than murder. However, if a terrorist kills someone in a forest, and no one is around to see it, does it reverberate across America? NO. The media's focus on 9/11, for instance, spread fear across the nation, something which could have been easily controlled by limiting its publicity. Our media, therefore, can act as an instrument for terrorists across the world. Why does the media publicize 9/11, then? Because it's a HUGE NEWS STORY, and brought in BILLIONS, because that's what people wanted to read about, and you can't fault them for that. And that is why terrorism works.
Another example is the recently decided Westboro court case, in which Westboro won (8-1), allowing them to continue protesting at soldiers' funerals (they believe that a soldier's death is God's punishment for America's tolerance of homosexuals). There is another reason they picket at military funerals, however, and that's publicity. By demonstrating at these big events, they can spread their message across the nation (via media coverage) and inspire hatred, fear, and even some support. They are obviously less effective than terrorists (most people understand they're just whack jobs), but it satisfies what they want, and so they continue to slander our nation's finest. Again, because society demands it, the media brings it.
The tough question is, can we resolve this? Blocking the media would inhibit freedom of the press. Blocking Westboro (according to the Supreme Court) precludes free speech. The media also has some societal benefits, so a tax/subsidy to correct an externality wouldn't work. The best we can do, right now, is inform the public of consequences of their thirst, and that's why I've taken the time to write this.
