For my last post, I would like to talk about my own little media guilty pleasure. Here it goes…I am an avid reader of the New York Times Arts Section. There I said it. When push comes to shove, I am more interested in what’s happening in the music, art, and theater world than I am in politics. I know, I should care more about the more “serious” subjects in the news, but I firmly believe that the various outlets of personal expression are as important to our society as any political news. It should also be noted at this point that I double majored in Music and Art History as an undergraduate, and I am planning to pursue a career in singing, so my opinions may be more than slightly biased.
Some of my favorite pieces on the site are the videos and audio slideshows that have become integral to the site. They often include audio clips from operas they are discussing, like their coverage of John Adam’s Doctor Atomic at the Metropolitan Opera (http://video.nytimes.com/video/2008/10/12/arts/1194822981488/scenes-from-doctor-atomic.html?scp=2&sq=doctor%20atomic&st=cse), or coverage of special events celebrating the arts, like this past week’s video covering the Alvin Ailey Dance Company’s 50th Anniversary Gala (http://video.nytimes.com/video/playlist/arts/urbaneye/1194811622319/index.html#1194834813698). This is all in addition to the countless reviews of theatrical and musical productions, as well as announcements of new exhibitions, going on in and around the city. Above all, the arts section, for me at least, provides a welcome distraction from the current news stories taking over the Time’s front page. I hope this little rambling of mine has given some of you readers incentive to check out other parts of your paper besides the front page seriousness :)
Tuesday, December 9, 2008
Tuesday, December 2, 2008
Puppetry of...the Media?
So I must confess that when I open up my internet browser, my homepage is the New York Times website. I’ve been reading the paper since I was little, and I tend to think that the writing is on the whole fairly unbiased. Maybe this is because I’ve grown up with it and believe most of the views the journalists are inevitably feeding me, or maybe it’s because I’m New Yorker
Yesterday, when opening my browser, the picture and main headline on the site caught my attention. But instead of covering a national topic, like Obama’s recent election of his cabinet members, the Times chose to zero in on a local human interest subject, with an article entitled, “Forget Citigroup, Puppet Show Needs a Bailout” (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/02/theater/02pupp.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&ref=arts). It tells of a charming little marionette theater in a “decidedly scrappy edge of downtown Los Angeles” that has been entertaining children for almost fifty years, but is now facing potential bankruptcy, with the owner of the establishment (and head puppeteer) owing over $30,000 in debt.
This story caught my attention because it came off to me as so liberally biased. The writer stresses the importance of the theater as a quaint, anti-commercialist venture that has not changed for five decades and has been pleasing children with puppets and old-fashioned ice-cream. She goes on to say that the marionette theater is a “charming throwback” in comparison to the Hollywood theaters where “organic certifications of birthday cakes are debated at length on Web sites,” and that without this theater, many lower-class children in the area would never have the opportunity to see a live production. Clearly, this writer has an agenda to highlight the importance of small-town businesses that provide the same services as those found in corporate America, with more charm and down-to-earth roots. I’m not saying that I don’t agree, but by putting this article on the front page of its website, the New York Times is making a statement about its tendencies towards liberal bias.
Yesterday, when opening my browser, the picture and main headline on the site caught my attention. But instead of covering a national topic, like Obama’s recent election of his cabinet members, the Times chose to zero in on a local human interest subject, with an article entitled, “Forget Citigroup, Puppet Show Needs a Bailout” (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/02/theater/02pupp.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&ref=arts). It tells of a charming little marionette theater in a “decidedly scrappy edge of downtown Los Angeles” that has been entertaining children for almost fifty years, but is now facing potential bankruptcy, with the owner of the establishment (and head puppeteer) owing over $30,000 in debt.
This story caught my attention because it came off to me as so liberally biased. The writer stresses the importance of the theater as a quaint, anti-commercialist venture that has not changed for five decades and has been pleasing children with puppets and old-fashioned ice-cream. She goes on to say that the marionette theater is a “charming throwback” in comparison to the Hollywood theaters where “organic certifications of birthday cakes are debated at length on Web sites,” and that without this theater, many lower-class children in the area would never have the opportunity to see a live production. Clearly, this writer has an agenda to highlight the importance of small-town businesses that provide the same services as those found in corporate America, with more charm and down-to-earth roots. I’m not saying that I don’t agree, but by putting this article on the front page of its website, the New York Times is making a statement about its tendencies towards liberal bias.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)