Awiakta's article is about The Tellico Dam controversy, what it was, what it was not, and what it should have been. The Tellico Dam was a proposal by the Tennessee Valley Authority to dam the Little Tennessee River. She critiques the media for reporting largely on the plight of the snail darter, the corruption and bureaucracy involved in building the dam, and economics. The largest issue she sees with the dam was the incursion on historic Cherokee cultural and burial lands in the flooded valley. The Cherokee's attempts to stop the closing of the dams gates are discussed.
Awiaka raises some alarming points. If the press picks and chooses how it wants to create stories, what particular issue it wants to raise as the main area of debate, what is left out? How much is the public missing? I think there could be an argument that the internet has changed this to some extent. There is now more content produced and shared instantly to more people. More information is available so more perspectives should, theoretically be put forward. I could also see how the press could still be falling in this habit in the internet age. How many articles on websites are original content, and how many are just republications from somewhere else. Online articles are fact checked less, and shared with less thought than articles in print. Most things online seem to be just copies, rewrites, imitations of the same story or issue. Where are the other perspectives?
No comments:
Post a Comment