One thing I found super interesting was a concept found in the conclusion, where Archer asserts that when elites question the credibility of the media, it allows for citizens to dismiss anything they disagree with as fake news and exacerbates divisions of society. I think this is very relevant because as we’ve laughed before in this class, people tend to follow others in positions of power or higher rank, for example groupthink. I think that if a person in power, like the President, says that “the press is the enemy” and calls out fake news or discredits the news then people will also do this in order to be in the in-group and have a sense of belonging. This is very detrimental in my opinion because once a society or group of people begin to vilify or not believe the news, the already visible divisions in society will be emphasized and enlarged, which isn’t good.
However, I do think that news should not not be criticized because sometimes they get it wrong or they step too far in their research. An example of this would be the Chicago newscaster who lied about being in a helicopter who was hit by enemy fire (everyone onboard died) but instead was in the other helicopter that safely landed. This aspect of news, the lying to create a story, should be criticized and removed but the informative nature of the news that usually occurs should be trusted and continued in society.
Agreed. the news in my opinion should always be criticized to find the actual “story”. and slightly contrary to your opinion i think the president can do this more than the common person just because he is the center of many of these stories.