| With its broad scope, Benjamin Radford's Media | | | | brief appearance in the beginning, the information |
| Mythmakers: How Journalists, Activists and | | | | on advertising may be better examined as part |
| Advertisers Mislead Us explores the ways in which | | | | of other media manipulation tactics. The book's |
| the media misleads the American public. It is a | | | | overall format also feels cluttered. While part of it |
| multifaceted study, drawing examples from | | | | stems from the numerous sources cited, the |
| advertising and activism as well as mainstream | | | | layout is more akin to a string of extended |
| media activities. The book's fascinating information | | | | essays combined into a hardcover book with no |
| is buried in redundant text and circular organization. | | | | thoughtful transitions between them. Dedicating |
| Is Radford's scope too broad? Is a book written | | | | individual chapters to the most prominent cases |
| in 2003 still relevant? These are just a couple | | | | of media misbehavior would have facilitated more |
| questions that arise from Media Mythmakers, and | | | | thorough and easy to follow discussion of the |
| only the author can truly answer them. The | | | | exact tactics used to sway public opinion and |
| information the book contains may hint at the | | | | information. |
| answers. | | | | Media Mythmakers also falters in properly |
| The first step in answering these questions is | | | | identifying its audience. The language used shifts |
| determining what information is well presented. | | | | between formal and colloquial. This bipolarity |
| Radford succeeds in detailing the mainstream | | | | suggests Radford attempted to write this book |
| media's exploitation of emotion. He explains | | | | to appeal to two very different groups: the |
| common logical fallacies committed by | | | | intellectually ambitious and mainstream media |
| martyrmakers. With that, examples of groups | | | | consumers. Finding a middle ground for these |
| profiting from tragic events illustrate some of the | | | | groups is difficult at best, and such fluctuation in |
| most deplorable aspects of the media and | | | | diction is not a constructive way to achieve that |
| ordinary people working together to manipulate | | | | goal. The intellectually ambitious crowd of this |
| public opinion. This book is one of the few | | | | decade, meanwhile, will regard much of the |
| instances where anyone pins responsibility for | | | | information presented as old news. The statistics |
| declining media quality on the American populace. | | | | for white collar crime are a prime example of |
| Another concept Radford examines with particular | | | | such information; this information is now taught in |
| care is bias, be it the inherently subjective nature | | | | introductory social science courses at various |
| of journalism or his own bias in writing the book. | | | | higher education institutions. If this book is |
| He also discusses the value of critical thinking in a | | | | intended for the more cerebral audience, |
| variety of situations from causes du jour to the | | | | expanded discussion on the less obvious topics |
| effect of media-induced hype on the legislative | | | | (e.g. activist manipulation of the media and the |
| process. At its best, Mythmakers dissects the | | | | humanitarian aid paradox) would be a more |
| consequences of emotion-clouded judgment and | | | | sensible approach. Meanwhile, a more mainstream |
| its effects on people being accurately informed of | | | | audience may need to be alerted of the white |
| the most complex issues of the day. | | | | collar crime statistics. No matter the audience, |
| While the book provides useful information, the | | | | new information needs to be presented to reflect |
| organization of data and analysis feels frenetic, as | | | | the changes in the media environment since 2003. |
| information gets lost in ill-formed transitions. | | | | The audience and its various subsections have |
| Radford's examples jump around, and he relies | | | | changed significantly since that time. |
| heavily on three news stories for examples of | | | | Radford's book provides some useful information |
| substandard journalism practices: Princess Diana's | | | | regarding the state of contemporary media. |
| death, the Columbine shootings, and 9/11. This | | | | Finding that information is a test of reading skill |
| repetition in the book becomes tiring; perhaps | | | | and perseverance. Valuable information hides in |
| Radford should have treated them as case | | | | redundancy and outdated statistics. Media |
| studies so errors in media could be noted in one | | | | Mythmakers covers a subject that deserves |
| or two chapters instead of several. Likewise, the | | | | more careful examination than what is currently |
| chapters on advertising are incongruent in tone | | | | given. Radford should consider rewriting this book |
| and content when compared to the rest of the | | | | for the new decade, which has not only a new |
| book. While reading later chapters, I wondered if | | | | crop of stories bungled by the media but also a |
| advertising would be further addressed. Given its | | | | transformed audience. |