Nowadays, the mass media do not report the news; they make the news.

Discuss this with references to recent events.

Yes, I do agree with this statement to a small extent.

Media has increasingly become part and parcel of our lives. In short, the impact of media in our lives today has become tremendously huge. Somehow, the information provided by media could perhaps be less accurate compared to obtaining direct first hand information. This could have been due to various reasons. However, I will briefly elaborate on one of the more significant reason.

One such reason is to generate readership. (for internet servers/magazines/newspapers perhaps?)

In my opinion, to generate readership does not equate to having the right to make news which information may or may not be accurate at times.

Article 1: http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/268154/1/.html

An extract of the article can be shown below

For Bryan and Zach, disbelief at this turn of events turned to horror, when a wire report afterward painted the Singapore team’s reaction as one of happiness.

According to reports by Associated Press, “members of Singapore’s relay team pointed at the ‘DSQ’ (disqualified) listed next to the United States on a television monitor and smiled”. The widely-circulated report ran in publications across the globe, including Sports Illustrated magazine, Californian newspaper Whittier Daily News and The Statesman in India. On Monday, the Singapore Swimming Association (SSA) came out strongly to refute the report.

Said SSA vice-president Oon Jin Gee: “We have zero tolerance for mistakes in relays. Why should the boys be smiling when they understand the severity of those mistakes?

It puzzled me to know how a smile could brought about so much controversial issues. A food for thought: Was it solely just a concidental issue that was blow up unintentionally somehow? Or was it due to some other reasons? Hopefully, it is the former.

There are also other issues that paparazzi may have distorted and exaggerated the facts somehow. One such issue could be the relationship between Prince William and his girlfriend.

Article 2: About Prince William

http://edition.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/europe/04/14/britain.william.reut/index.html?eref=edition_europe

This can greatly show how media has a big impact on the person reported. Media, in my opinion, can either make you or destroy you. One's reputation is greatly at staked as shown due to this invincible power which can have disastorous effect on one when inaccurate information is being circluated around.

Article 3: 11 Convent Schools threatened to sue SPH

http://www.sgforums.com/?action=thread_display&thread_id=211156 (1st Post)

This was a huge issue which cause an uproar from parents of students studying in the 11 Convent Schools in Singapore. There were numerous complains and threats to sue the editor who published the report stating that: (see extract below)

"'IJ girls' is a generalisation for girls who study in CHIJ schools and who like to hem their school uniforms real short, wear their belts real low on their hips, and are allegedly easy when it comes to the opposite sex," a paragraph read.

A cartoon above the paragraph also showed a girl in blue lighting up a cigarette

This report generalises the girls in these convent schools too much. The introduction of the A-Z report shown in the Sunday's Time was indeed interesting but it seemed to be exaggerating at the section under "I" by stating such claims on these students. Must media be done at the expense of innocent people?

In a nutshell, I believe that things will turn for the better if media (on the whole) would be more responsible in the publishing of their reports. It ultimately boils down to one's reputation and so, mass media should think twice before making such dramatic news just for the sake of generating readership or even, bluntly to put, mainly for the sake of reporting news.