Case analysis of how and why corporate media manipulate the public opinion.

Media analysis - Selling behaviours through the media

Last week the mainstream Canadian press published the news of a poor women in Ontario who commited suicide (while 6-month pregnant) in her own apartment where she'd been confined by the court after being convicted of fraud (she'd received student loans while collecting welfare). Apparently the debt-ridden woman, unable to see an end to her misery, seeked refuge in death.

Regardless of its accuracy, the story illustrates how financial troubles can lead to fraud, criminality and even self-destruction. However in the mind of the average Globe & Mail reader, it becomes something like this:
"Hell, if this happened to me, I'd just go bankrupt before ending up a criminal on welfare".
Problem solved.

Only days later, another story (read here) appears in the National Post. This time it's about a women who "lives plastic free", not by choice but as a solution to accumulated debt. Ms. Gale's [that's her name] is portrayed as a positive role model who managed to face problems in a responsible manner which "has given me back the kind of life I want."

This "responsible" manner is a consumer proposal which can, in some cases, be a win-win solutions for all parties invloved - just like bankruptcy can also be the best solution sometimes. But this is not my point. My point is about the fact that this story comes to override the previous one in the public opinion. "Bankruptcy struck me as a sense of failure," was said in pull-quote. This is definitely selling a particular behaviour in the interest of AMEX, VISA, MasterCard and all others.

To what extent? Let's look at some figures:

"In Ms. Gale's case, she must pay off 18% of her $40,000 worth of credit card and consumer debt in four years.

With a readership of many hundred thousands or even millions of readers, we can assume at least a small number of readers were facing financial troubles at the time of publishing. The "few" $40,000 potential losses that AMEX or VISA will recover this month through consumer proposals will surely pay for more than their share of newspaper publicity in the National Post.

That's the immediate "return on assets" of such a story. Now imagine how lucrative these "suggestion" patterns can be in long run. The National Post gives it away as part of the story:

"Some bankruptcy trustees fear the number of consumer insolvencies -- bankruptcies and consumer proposals -- are set to take a big jump in the next year or so, fuelled by high credit card debt, moribund stock markets and a slowing North American economy.
In the first six months of this year, consumer insolvencies are up about 4% from the corresponding period last year, according to the federal superintendent of bankruptcy.
Frank Kisluk, president of Debtor Consulting Services Ltd., is more pessimistic. He fears insolvencies could increase by more than 17% by the end of 2001. He cites the U.S. experience -- which Canada generally mirrors -- where personal bankruptcies increased by 17% in the first quarter of this year.

Now you see what's at stake. This is the "business case in the story", and it's the best quality of a newspaper editor to be able to fit a business case behind as many stories as possible.

So you thought reading the news was good for you? Sure it is. Do read them, but make sure you think for yourself.