[ad_1]
ACTS Post opinions with a wide range of perspectives to encourage constructive discussion.
When Mutafchiiski was installed in every home, it became clear that there were two types of media. Some work for the people and do their professional duty, while others produce a whirlwind of nonsense.
Comment from Alexander Detev
I want to say a good word for the media. For the real media. And maybe more than one word.
“Hey, they only write about the coronavirus!”
7:00 in the morning. The phone alarm rings. I reach out to turn it off. “Let me see how many new cases there are today.” I open a news site. “Hey, they just write about the coronavirus. How can they not be embarrassed? I’m getting angry. I pause for a second to calm down.” And why did I enter this site? Oh yeah, to see how many new cases of coronavirus there are today ” .
At some point in March, when the pandemic took hold of us and turned our lives upside down, we recovered a defeated attitude towards television that even seemed archaic. Young and old, rich and poor, busy and free, they remembered or learned for the first time what time the main television news programs were. What’s more, they all settled down properly in front of the television to watch them day after day.
And yet, in the way we consume media, something significant has changed: critical thinking. Today he is sharp, ruthless, sometimes even extremely rough. Yes, criticism is undoubtedly mandatory for a democratic and progressive society, but at the same time there is a logical question on the agenda: Are we critical of the media because we want a better and better information environment or because we believe that without the need for media and journalists? Do you remember these unceremonious (and exaggerated) exclamations: the questions were “stupid,” the reporters were “incompetent,” the protests were “manipulative,” the virus was either very central to the news or generated mostly poor and cutting information? ? But have we asked ourselves how we got here and what we can do to improve the situation?
When Mutafchiiski settled at home
When the National Headquarters of Operations held its press conference every day, and Professor Mutafchiiski had installed himself in all Bulgarian homes, questions from the media about NIGHT aroused strong emotions in all of us. These press conferences were attended by competent and well-trained journalists who asked perfectly reasonable questions; I hope no one questions this fact. And yet, the most attractive attention was directed to the media representatives who managed to speak first. With particular confidence and ruthlessness, they poured out a torrent of nonsensical and, to put it mildly, embarrassing questions, in which conspiracy theories were intertwined with philosophical musings such as “Is the coronavirus really a coronavirus?”
And this outrage occurs at a time when true and comprehensive information is healing the sanity of an entire nation facing an invisible and unknown enemy. Yes, such manic and harmful creatures have been and always will be, but the public alarm and outrage must be caused by something else: the fact that they have the ridiculous but necessary self-confidence and the proper approaches to come forward and produce this. a whirlwind of air droplet nonsense. And they have confidence and access, because in a long process their “media” were legalized and legitimized on an equal footing with the real media. This legitimacy was granted to them by certain circles of the political and business elite, who especially chose the publications over a few silver coins. Victims of this cynical scheme have been those journalists and the media who have not yet forgotten their main functions and their main duty to the people: to be critical, ask uncomfortable questions and seek responsibility from those to whom we have delegated. the right to make decisions for us.
No, “people” sometimes lag behind in matters
“People are always right,” says dubious popular wisdom. Because in this case the fault lies with the “people”, that is, the audience, who, albeit unconsciously, to this day have not fully accepted the news that freedom of expression is a great value. A value that costs expensive, that needs daily support and promotion. A large part of the Bulgarian public understands nothing else: that every mature, democratic and free society develops the reflex to defend its investigative journalists and their critical voices. That is why and how incompetent provocateurs and manipulators attracted the full attention of society, while at the same time those who diligently tried to practice their profession were branded as “turkeys”. It’s sad that this same simplicity remains Prime Minister Boyko Borissov’s catchphrase for 2020.
Who is on the front line?
It would be an exaggeration to say “All bad for good,” but the pandemic may have spawned a good thing: the care and respect we have paid to those key professions that we often forget are accompanied by daily sacrifice on behalf of others. The sisters received applause, and hopefully this applause brings them at least some consolation at a time when they themselves have been victims of all the long-standing problems that the state of Bulgaria suffers from: corruption, bankrupt institutions, expelled young experts. And a nascent digitization. which remains completely incompatible with the requirements of a modern European country in the 21st century.
There are others on the front line. For example, police officers performing their official duties, regardless of the conditions. On that dramatic night of September 2, when the provocateurs had joined the ranks of citizens who had been protesting peacefully for months, I saw with my own eyes the police officers who had to stand idly by while the bombs and various objects flew towards them. Yes, they stood idly by because they were ordered to do so. They were on the front line.
To be shown on television or to serve the people
And on the other side were the journalists. Each of them could choose for himself whether to be in the front line or not. Either to risk your health and physical integrity in the name of work and professional duty or to go back 2-3 meters. Some chose the first: journalists were sprayed with tear gas, a journalist was beaten by police officers… Why didn’t these people back down?
Well, because journalism, like medicine and law, is a vocation. Most journalists do not distinguish between work and leisure. The stories are all around you and you are constantly looking for them. Of course, there are those who have chosen this profession because, let’s put it that way, they just want to see themselves on television. But the latter will never be in the front line. They will choose to step back. And the former, those from the dangerous border, with microphone and camera in hand, have voluntarily chosen to be at the forefront. They are exactly what we need and value. And if the last members of this race disappear, dictatorship and oppression will take over society without resistance. Through the main entrance, on the red carpet. I wish that in the new year I realize this and pay more attention to those who have chosen not to betray their principles and morals and to be at the forefront.
It’s not that they haven’t sworn.
Bulgaria
[ad_2]
