Frontline Essay

Foucalt said that Ð''Truth is produced only by virtue of multiple forms of constraint'. Indeed, he is right. In the 21st century society we live in, truth is a social construct, shaped by a certain few who have the power to deem what is accepted as truth. Arguably ulterior motives, personal agendas, corporate and political interests affect the representation of the truth. Ð''Frontline', Ð''US Media Blues' and Ð''Media Watch' attempt to give insight on how media corporations represent the truth. Collectively, these three texts are an invitation for responders to question the authority and work ethics of those who control the telling of the truth, and think critically of how the truth can be distorted or misrepresented.

Arguably, the representations of truth by the media are influenced by ulterior motives. Frontline satirize such motives of media networks by purposely misrepresenting a current affairs program so to invite scrutiny upon the representations of truth. The opening sequence of each episode uses a combination of fast paced music and off screen shots so to give Frontline all the appearances of a real current affairs program. However it is when we see Mike Moore, a ridiculously exaggerated representation of Ray Martin, that we realize that Frontline is satirizing the works of the media. For example, the episode Ð''Add sex and stir', uses characterization and dialogue to invite scrutiny upon the importance of ratings for media corporations. Evidence of this is found through the characterization of Brian, an executive producer who lacks morals or decency. Through Brian's crude dialogue, Ð''sport rates, sex rates, put the two together and you've got dynamite', Frontline invites responders to reflect upon the morals that journalists should hold. According to the AJA code of ethics, journalists should Ð''not place unnecessary emphasis on personal characteristics such as sex or gender'. However, it is blatant that Brian does not embed these values and hence this misrepresentation evokes questions concerning the reliability of the information and hence truth presented to the responder.

Journalist A.J Liebling said that Ð''the freedom of the press is limited to those who own one'. This idea is certainly prevalent when analyzing US Media Blues. Through the use of un-prompted interviews with relevant people, this documentary attempts to bring to the responder's attention the failings of the US media to present the facts on the War on Terror. Evidence of this is found in the un-prompted interview with Jon Alpert, a Freelance TV journalist who claims that the Bush administration had to Ð''sell war by painting a pretty face on itÐ'...showing it in red, white and blue'. The lack of narration in the documentary allows the information to be presented as objectively as the viewer can possibly expect. This confronts the responders and allows them to critically analyse the use of propaganda and manipulation of the truth. Scott Ritter a former UN inspector in Iraq further argues that political and military censorships Ð''exploited the ignorance of Americans' where the media were Ð''not reporters, but cheerleaders for Bush'. The documentary suggests that the media was complicit in carefully selecting images that would get the right reactions from the audience, supporting the idea that the representation of the truth is easily compromised by corporate and political interests.

Similarly, Media Watch hosted by Liz Jackson, is a non-commercial program which exposes the unethical practices and ulterior motives of media networks. By presenting the responder with opinionated yet well researched material, it invites scrutiny upon the practices of the media. Replays of recent news coverage in Media watch is used to bring to our attention the techniques used by the media to ensure a captive audience. Evidence of this is found in a replay of cliffhanger aired on Ten News, Ð''after the break, a man falls from a Ferris wheel, but did he survive the tumble down?' The sarcastic tone in which the host delivers rhetorical question, Ð''Does a tease for TV news get tackier than that?' invites us to question the ulterior motives of media networks. It becomes obvious that this Ð''ghoulish tease' is an attempt by the network to Ð''drag out the suspense and hold the punters through the next ad break'. Media watch supports Chomsky's argument that we as the audience are sold as products to larger corporate companies. Hence the reliability of the information presented to us becomes