Narrowcasting- a Harmless Medium or a Threat to Democracy?

Narrowcasting- a harmless medium or a threat to democracy?

INTRODUCTION

In this research essay, I have chosen to explore the question 1 on narrowcasting in this post-broadcast news era. In relation to the question given to me I will be discussing whether people are getting too little exposure to serious affairs outside their own areas of interest due to customised information sources via digital technology whose creditability can be questioned. And ultimately, whether these trends of narrowcasting will pose a threat to democracy.

In this essay I will be trying to draw a solid conclusion as to find out if amateur sources in narrowcasting are really credible or not, and whether or not people are getting less exposure because of narrowcasting, which is being accused of posing as a danger to the future of democracy.

In relation to this I have come up with a hypothesis statement: Credibility of amateur sources can be questioned and more exposure to Narrowcasting will lead to a lack of knowledge which will pose as a democratic threat. In order to construct a conclusion based on the above question and prove my hypothesis to be correct, we must first correctly define the meaning of the term narrowcasting in full context. Narrowcasting can be said to be “the diffusion of various genres in similar interest groups for a specific publics”. (Fleras, 2003)

From my comprehension of the question, I have generated 3 main points which I will discussing with the aid of various sources from a number of mediums, with the intent of drawing a credible conclusion.

These are my 3 main points:

1. Are online amateur sources really reliable?

2. Are people gaining less exposure and knowledge of the real world because of narrowcasting?

3. Is narrowcasting somewhat putting the future of democracy at risk?

A GLIMPS INTO THE STARTING POINT OF NARROWCASTING

The narrowcasting development started in the late 1960s to early 1970s in the...