The media pay too much attention to the lives and relationships of celebrities such as actors, singer or footballers. They should spend more time reporting they lives of ordinary people instead.
To what extent do you agree or disagree?
The coverage which is given by mass media lately leaning to expose daily life of celebrities such as actors, singer or footballers. However, they are rarely to report the ordinary people. It is argued that mass media should reduce reporting the celebrities excessively and raise the proportion of little-known people. However, I would argue that media has immense influence in order to change public perception, simultaneously also to educate society.
The presence of mass media today, it depends on how much public trust given to them. Thus, they have to maintain their content so as to retain its image. However, it is undeniable that media coverage brings the positive and negative side. In positive side, they tend to expose well-known people such as achievement from the actors or popular athletes so as to society will imitate their accomplishment. At the same time, they also frequently blow up negative side from the celebrities' behavior such as broken home or alcohol abuse. Definitely, it is really dangerous for fanatic fans are likely to follow their bad influence.
Therefore, I firmly believe that ordinary people have a thousand inspiring stories which is more valuable to spread, even some of them have become heroes in their communities. For example, Haryanto, a person who success to discover electricity in his own village by utilizing river as a main source. Because of his worthwhile striving effort, the occupants surrounded them have been able to use electricity. This certainly are more valuable to be published to the society since the main function of mass media is educated people more.
All in all, I agree that mass media should arrange the publicity of celebrities since some of them just more showing bad influence for society. Otherwise, ordinary people should acquire high proportion because society need educated channel
To what extent do you agree or disagree?
The coverage which is given by mass media lately leaning to expose daily life of celebrities such as actors, singer or footballers. However, they are rarely to report the ordinary people. It is argued that mass media should reduce reporting the celebrities excessively and raise the proportion of little-known people. However, I would argue that media has immense influence in order to change public perception, simultaneously also to educate society.
The presence of mass media today, it depends on how much public trust given to them. Thus, they have to maintain their content so as to retain its image. However, it is undeniable that media coverage brings the positive and negative side. In positive side, they tend to expose well-known people such as achievement from the actors or popular athletes so as to society will imitate their accomplishment. At the same time, they also frequently blow up negative side from the celebrities' behavior such as broken home or alcohol abuse. Definitely, it is really dangerous for fanatic fans are likely to follow their bad influence.
Therefore, I firmly believe that ordinary people have a thousand inspiring stories which is more valuable to spread, even some of them have become heroes in their communities. For example, Haryanto, a person who success to discover electricity in his own village by utilizing river as a main source. Because of his worthwhile striving effort, the occupants surrounded them have been able to use electricity. This certainly are more valuable to be published to the society since the main function of mass media is educated people more.
All in all, I agree that mass media should arrange the publicity of celebrities since some of them just more showing bad influence for society. Otherwise, ordinary people should acquire high proportion because society need educated channel