In today’s ever-changing landscape, it’s hard to not have an opinion. We’re always told to choose one side over the other, to have a concrete perspective, to be secure in what we think. I question if this statement stands true in a world that continues to show us that thinking for oneself is no longer valuable. Our world is fueled by virality, yet today’s media has grown fearful, sometimes, to the point of complacency.
Today’s media landscape entices readers with its controversial headlines– we become tempted to click, not for the content itself, but for what a small blurb has to say. A lot of readers no longer value the entirety of a piece of writing, and this becomes apparent in the type of media we are exposed to. The rise of podcasts and short-form videos pushes away the traditional media we are used to, making our media lack substance and originality. Newspapers, while still prevalent in the digital form, are trying to adjust to the modern media format that values things in smaller increments. There seems to be a ‘formula’ that gets the most clicks, but does this take away from the quality of what we’re consuming?
I find that the nagging questions readers want answers to in various media forms are glazed over– they may be discussed for a brief moment, but there seems to be something holding them back from addressing the entire question. There are many reasons why this may be; one of which being the intense ‘cancel culture’ modern-day social media has emphasized. Some may be blacklisted for heinous actions they may have taken, yet others get slander for seemingly miniscule problems. It creates an environment where the author is being extra cautious, trying not to disappoint their audience.
This can take away from the overall goal of an opinionated piece of content, as it’s meant as a form of expressing personal perspectives, and not solely catering to an audience. As a reader, I long to hear the different viewpoints writers share; it makes me reflect and think of the writing as a conversation. However, modern-day media can feel like the oversaturation of the same things, as differences of opinions aren’t as prevalent. Cancel culture is definitely a contributing factor, but another thing to consider is the threat our press has faced.
Articles faced with scrutiny, talk shows suspended, op-eds leading to run-ins with Immigration and Customs Enforcement are just a few of the limitations the press has endured in the past year. Most recently, the short-lived suspension of the Jimmy Kimmel Show had many questioning whether or not it’s acceptable to voice gripes one may have with the federal government. More and more people would rather be forced into a box of neutrality because it decreases the threat of negative feedback. Most don’t want their words to be suppressed, yet this pattern of having to share one opinion fosters a community of writers that become hesitant to even share their viewpoints.
Modern day media has certainly become a place of complicity and complacency. There’s hesitance when it comes to speaking out against lingering issues. While I believe that it’s not entirely their fault, writers shouldn’t have to feel impending doom when speaking about topics they care about. While the world has so much good to offer, it’s equally important to shed light on groups who may not have the ability to plead for relief. Sometimes, I feel as if American journalists have a tendency to heavily emphasize domestic issues over dire global crises, but that can also be attributed to the nationalism our country built itself upon. As a country with a melting pot of ethnicities, our media is responsible for shedding light on the most vulnerable- it may be difficult right now, but it certainly isn’t impossible to accomplish. Complicity is another form of silence. Taking a stance, speaking out, communicating an opinion through writing is a step in the right direction.
