Cause-oriented writing and other forms of mass media is rebellious
It all started as journalists and other cause oriented media practitioners unveil such perennial problems that involved prominent officials and other personalities. Their activity may possibly be given good results, but in fact, it end up nothing except- ending up buried in the graves or simply disappeared away and never to be heard again.
This problem somehow shows how these people are doing their work for a cause, not just informing but also enlightening the people about the daily acts of life. Imbued with idealism and fully influenced with realism, these people in the media tried much in exposing the problems of today no matter what effect it is and even meeting its conclusion-including death.
But to others, working in that kind of job, especially cause oriented journalism, somehow may ought to call it dangerous. Cause oriented journalism? They would prefer working in a fashion magazine or indulging in an apathetic-oriented journalism like showbiz or whatsoever except politics and the society, all after witnessing students of mass media as of now preferred to be apathetic and ignorant of the society while intelligent in terms of "neutral" topics like showbiz and the like.
Anyway,
Based on my work, "Mass media, Propaganda and the society," it says:
"First and foremost, Mass media, a part of human society, is a contributor of human affairs, especially in giving ideas and events to every people. It is serve as a propaganda tool in disseminating the pros and cons of every individual or every group in pursuit of their beliefs they must defend or offend, as part of our daily lives in giving entertainment and in educating every citizen in this kind of struggling world we belong."
True, but despite its contributions to the human society, mass media, especially cause-oriented writing seemingly end up either in the trash bin or having its practitioners be harassed or even killed-that makes the younger generation of writers preferred writing "safe" topics, which in fact propagating apathy or blind tolerance instead of engaging in struggle.
For sure we writers and media practitioners greatly believed in the word "The pen is mightier than the sword", but the word becomes somewhat "untrue" when it comes to reality, lucky that one writer, Butch Espere, said:
"...haven't you noticed? we no longer hear people say 'the pen is mightier than the sword'. maybe because the gem in such saying has been dulled by the laptop revolution. but above all because it was never true. In history, the pen has been mighty only where it worked to herald the unsheathing of the sword."
Since history is evident that struggle is inevitable and protracted, it all goes both the pen and the sword as weapons of the people. Somehow the age-old quote "the pen is mightier than the sword" may not be true at all as time goes by, and instead being substituted by the saying that "the pen is mighty as it worked to herald the unsheathing of the sword"-signifying that through the cause-written works, as being read by the people supports in responding popular expression and eventually dissent instead of advocating "pacifism" a la Jose Rizal-that every tyrant tried much to silence the voices of those who oppose their tyrannical policies and of the like. Rizal somehow wanted to do so through Noli me Tangere and El Filibusterismo-he experimented reform, but the latter work experimented revolution, and whilst studying it, I really think that the people focused much on the former despite recognizing (but in fact disregarding) the latter-which end up a basis by the subversive Bonifacio.
As of now there are more deaths amongst the media practitioners around the world. Like the Ampatuan genocide happened last year, and other politically motivated extra-judicial killings, it shows that cause-oriented writing, in the eyes of a conservative, gunpowder-minded irrational wingnut, is considered dangerous to them.
This problem somehow shows how these people are doing their work for a cause, not just informing but also enlightening the people about the daily acts of life. Imbued with idealism and fully influenced with realism, these people in the media tried much in exposing the problems of today no matter what effect it is and even meeting its conclusion-including death.
But to others, working in that kind of job, especially cause oriented journalism, somehow may ought to call it dangerous. Cause oriented journalism? They would prefer working in a fashion magazine or indulging in an apathetic-oriented journalism like showbiz or whatsoever except politics and the society, all after witnessing students of mass media as of now preferred to be apathetic and ignorant of the society while intelligent in terms of "neutral" topics like showbiz and the like.
Anyway,
Based on my work, "Mass media, Propaganda and the society," it says:
"First and foremost, Mass media, a part of human society, is a contributor of human affairs, especially in giving ideas and events to every people. It is serve as a propaganda tool in disseminating the pros and cons of every individual or every group in pursuit of their beliefs they must defend or offend, as part of our daily lives in giving entertainment and in educating every citizen in this kind of struggling world we belong."
True, but despite its contributions to the human society, mass media, especially cause-oriented writing seemingly end up either in the trash bin or having its practitioners be harassed or even killed-that makes the younger generation of writers preferred writing "safe" topics, which in fact propagating apathy or blind tolerance instead of engaging in struggle.
For sure we writers and media practitioners greatly believed in the word "The pen is mightier than the sword", but the word becomes somewhat "untrue" when it comes to reality, lucky that one writer, Butch Espere, said:
"...haven't you noticed? we no longer hear people say 'the pen is mightier than the sword'. maybe because the gem in such saying has been dulled by the laptop revolution. but above all because it was never true. In history, the pen has been mighty only where it worked to herald the unsheathing of the sword."
Since history is evident that struggle is inevitable and protracted, it all goes both the pen and the sword as weapons of the people. Somehow the age-old quote "the pen is mightier than the sword" may not be true at all as time goes by, and instead being substituted by the saying that "the pen is mighty as it worked to herald the unsheathing of the sword"-signifying that through the cause-written works, as being read by the people supports in responding popular expression and eventually dissent instead of advocating "pacifism" a la Jose Rizal-that every tyrant tried much to silence the voices of those who oppose their tyrannical policies and of the like. Rizal somehow wanted to do so through Noli me Tangere and El Filibusterismo-he experimented reform, but the latter work experimented revolution, and whilst studying it, I really think that the people focused much on the former despite recognizing (but in fact disregarding) the latter-which end up a basis by the subversive Bonifacio.
As of now there are more deaths amongst the media practitioners around the world. Like the Ampatuan genocide happened last year, and other politically motivated extra-judicial killings, it shows that cause-oriented writing, in the eyes of a conservative, gunpowder-minded irrational wingnut, is considered dangerous to them.
