Margaret Engel and others believe that video satellite phones, and successor technologies based on more traditional mobile-phone networks, may be as liberating a force in journalism as the Internet has been.
These technologies have made it possible for the average person to act as their own personal camera crew and reporter. It puts the power of the media in the hands of people worldwide. Are these new technologies going to change the media in an unfavorable way? Thomas B. Rosenstiel, a writer for the Los Angeles Times, says “Technology is a blessing and a curse.”
By changing media formats, we change the way information is gathered, presented, processed, and the way consumers are affected by it. The average reporter today is working under a tight deadline, much the same as a live television correspondent does. The problem is that in the past, accuracy and speed do not mix. With the new instant access to information, accuracy can suffer greatly. Clearly, one can argue that inaccurate newscasts are immoral and should be condemned. This might also fall into the “false advertisement” section of the United States legal system. After considering ethics and the law, it’s evidence that goes against the development of advanced technologies.
I think the development and heightened use of video satellite phones could lead to chaos in the media. This dilemma can also be evaluated with a utilitarian calculation. I would argue that the use of these mobile satellite phones would wreak havoc among the many broadcasting companies operating today. It gives the ability to broadcast news to people who might not be qualified to work with important or top secret information. I think this could lead to total chaos. People could broadcast any event to millions. Events like concerts, plays, or even movies could be broadcasted to people at low cost and totally disrupt the entire entertainment industry. Its reason like these that prove the utilitarian argument in that the use of these phones will not cause the greatest amount of happiness to the greatest number of people, in fact it will only inspire turmoil. On the other hand, taking a Kantian view, the intent of these satellite phones is to be used for the spread of information, like the Internet. Although this argument is made, I feel it’s a false representation of what will happen in the years to come. I think its clear after making these arguments that these phones may cause a certain liberation of the broadcasting industry.
Technology had become engrained in our society. Everywhere people are using cell phones, including children and teenagers. Cell phone technology and technology in general have change the way we do everything in our society. Technology has dramatically altered our world. They have become a necessary part of everyday life so much so that it is leaking into the education world as a new tool despite ...
The use of satellite phones isn’t a problem, yet. I think everything will be all right as long as this technology doesn’t become so cheap where any average person could get one. The phones are costly although there is little doubt that technological advances will continue to affect the way businesses operate. New satellite and digital technologies are likely to impact the products and services of the marketplace. That is mainly because satellites are expensive to build and launch and cost 250 million just to get it into orbit. In the years to come, a news event might be covered by dozens of ordinary people, using their mobile phones to broadcast live images. I hope this doesn’t happen, for the sake of the media, and for the integrity of news. I agree with this article in that in the race between the technology of liberation and the technology of control, the liberators should end up winning a heat. Then we would surely encounter chaos in the media in the future.