from ‘news’ to ‘fake news’

when donald trump targeted a cnn reporter saying that you represent ‘fake news’, not many media persons were amused. the fact is, why will they be? After all, they were a unified lot that worked to prevent trump from occupying the most powerful office in the world. many news outlets even explicitly endorsed hillary clinton in the 2016 presidential race.

but is this how media houses are expected to function?

‘news’, but where is it? today, we just watch and listen to analysis, debates, deliberations and like. just a few percentage is what that can be categorised as ‘news’.

so, they are not reporting news, they are, rather and sadly, making news, distorting truth, and serving the public with nothing more than insensible, and many a time, unsubstantiated, non-sense stories.

but why did this reach such heights? why did ‘sensationalism’ overshadow ‘genuine reporting’? there is no hard guessing, it’s the unprecedented rise in the number of media houses and the cut-throat competition that accompanied this development.

one is trying to portray itself as more sensational than the other, the other is competing with some other, and this vicious cycle of making news has led media houses to report ‘fake news’.

paid, distorted, irrelevant and superficial, all are part of ‘fake news’. and the losers are only the viewers. they make their minds and take decisions as framed by the media, hillary was considered as the saviour of mankind, trump an oppressor.

it’s just shallow stories and debates these days, no news. it’s time they correct themselves, for if the public eventually stops believing even their truth, their cameras and mics will be rendered obsolete.

give your verdict: