The role of the media: Fact or fiction?

A post by Shannon:

Recently I was thrilled when, in the lead up to the Australia v New Zealand netball test series, the Today Show featured the Australian Diamonds on the program, and Karl Stefanovic even took part in a mock training drill with the girls. I thought “wow, isn’t it fabulous that main stream breakfast television is promoting the series!”. Sadly it was all undone when, only minutes later, Neil Mitchell from 3AW radio (and a regular guest on the Today Show) told Karl that “netball is OK to play but boring to watch”. Neil Mitchell, if you are reading this blog (and I’m tipping you’re not) you should be ashamed of yourself.

The simple fact of the matter is that Mitchell’s statement is just not true. Regardless of if you are a netball fan, and even if you don’t know the rules, the rivalry between Australia and New Zealand has to be up there with the best in the world. For at least 15 years, these two teams have had hard fought matches with such close finishes. I could probably count on two hands the number of times that the final margin has been more than five goals. I think most people would be drawn into any sport where the lead changes constantly and the winner is literally not clear until the final siren.

But Mitchell, like everyone, is entitled to his opinion. However it got me to thinking: should media personalities make their opinions known, or should they simply report the facts, and allow the public to make their own decisions and inform their own opinions based on these facts.

The media is so influential in our day to day lives. And while I am certainly not endorsing censorship, or opposing freedom of speech, I believe that members of the media should be held to a higher standard. What was surely intended as an off the cuff remark by Mitchell, has the ability to influence others, and undo some of the good work of his fellow media members. In this instance it was a case of taking one step forward and two steps back.