Although many elements in the world of American journalism have remained the same over the years, the nascent sense that revolutionary changes are hovering over American society is largely indicated through the journalistic practices adopted in its inside the country. This article will delve into the meaning of American journalism in our society today by analyzing what the founders envisioned the role of the press to be, discovering whether right-wing or left-wing media are more honest, comparing and contrasting broadcast media and print media, and how each of them covered the 2016 presidential election, examining the role played by Internet media in the 2016 election and demonstrating the differences between American journalism and Finnish journalism, which is believed to be where the most active journalism is found today . Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay A free press is one of the indispensable pillars of a representative government. Freedom of the Press, written as Amendment I in the first 10 amendments of the Bill of Rights, states that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or restrict freedom of speech or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances” (Madison, 1789). These forty-five short but concise words were written by the founding fathers of the United States with the goal of safeguarding free speech and free press in the United States; Without the existence of the First Amendment, the United States would have had a very different society than it does today. However, American journalism, as the Founding Fathers predicted, is crumbling as Donald Trump, the 45th president of the United States, labels reputable news sources as fake news and warns journalists and those who want the truth to come out. out with lawsuits and lawsuits (Johnson, 2018). Not only is the president neglecting the very rights granted by the founding fathers, but he is actively attacking one of the pillars of democracy that helps it remain as it is. Mainly, the First Amendment means that the government does not have the right to put someone in a penitentiary, to punish him by making him pay a sum of money, or to bring a lawsuit against him, as the current president is trying to do right now with the journalists. His actions are violating the First Amendment, and society would be at a great loss if journalists were not allowed to publish their news as they perceive it. Journalists are not only threatened, but stopped and searched at US borders, and some journalists were recently arrested for “covering the protests at the inauguration and Standing Rock” (D'Arcy, 2017). If these arrests continue to increase in number, the United States could lead to the scenario depicted in George Orwell's book 1984. In the society created by Orwell in his infamous book, individuality is despised, thoughts and opinions are not allowed, and the way the government makes sure people have no individuality is through television screens and police thought; Orwell called this society he created Oceania, and in Oceania there are newspapers and television channels (Orwell, 1949). What is so manipulative about the media in Oceania is how previous newspapers and books are altered according to the government's desire while the originals are destroyed, so that the government can impose its ownstate of mind to society and make society doubt itself and its interests. memory through the destruction of the original versions of events. The government would use the medium of a memory hole, a machine used to alter or destroy intricate and ignominious documents that could lead to society questioning the government's credibility. While Orwell's Oceania would be an extreme, it gives his readers an idea of ​​the horrors that would take place if a society was deprived of its freedom of speech and press. Society must realize that freedom of speech and freedom of the press go hand in hand, and as freedom of the press is increasingly threatened, so does freedom of speech for the rest of society. Freedom of the press not only ensures that society is aware of what is happening in the world and around them, but also allows society to speak publicly and take a stand against political opinions if necessary. To this day, American journalism is so divided due to politics, distinguishing media from those supported by right-wing media and left-wing media. However, it is difficult to truly define the line that distinguishes these two political supporters; It's a very subjective question. But what is troubling is that you tune into Fox News and see the news in one light, whereas when you tune into CNN, the news is reported in a completely different way. This almost pushes society to choose a side, to choose the news source it wants to believe, but it is worrying that there are contradictory news on the same event broadcast at the same time. The underlying differences between left-wing and right-wing media focus on people's freedom versus the power government has over society. While one focuses on minimizing government involvement in people's lives, the other wants government to be more involved in people's lives. American journalism has deteriorated, with right-wing and left-wing media attacking each other, instead of publishing the news as they should and informing their readers and observers. For example, there has recently been national discussion about Starbucks and how some of their stores are considered discriminatory because they have called the police on African American customers who do not purchase anything but stay in the restaurant and café (Younes, 2018). Starbucks is a place where many people go to use the free Wi-Fi services that the company so actively promotes, and I myself have seen numerous times how people don't necessarily have to buy anything to stay in a Starbucks store, so the situation it's definitely controversial and not in line with how Starbucks usually portrays itself. However, it is treated very differently and from so many different angles. For example, a news source that supports left-wing media explains how right-wing media is supporting Bryan Sharpe, an individual who went to Starbucks, and said that because they are racist, and because he is black, he can get a free coffee like Starbucks is promoting on their social media accounts. There was no such promotion from Starbucks, but the Starbucks worker believed Sharpe and delivered his coffee to him, and Sharpe recorded the incident the entire time, which he later shared with the news . While the right-wing media sees Sharpe as a “comedian” and perceives his video as a joke, the left-wing media sees Sharpe as a mean person who trolls Starbucks during their dilemma (Wright, 2018). What we should focus on here is how people are inclined to watch news based on their beliefs, because there are suchnews sources. News reports increasingly lack integrity and focus on the political aspects of events rather than actually publishing the news. People are drawn to news sources that align with their beliefs; if someone is a Democrat and liberal, they may watch very different channels than their Republican counterparts. There is a clear news distortion within society, implying that society is part of the very problem that afflicts it. The 2016 presidential election was destined for the history books, as the nation was truly unaware of who their new president will be. Donald Trump, someone who is so outspoken and not always in a positive way, went on to become the 45th president. The presidential elections were covered completely differently by the right-wing and left-wing media. Long before Donald Trump proclaimed his candidacy for president, right-wing media had already become accustomed to being scorned by left-wing media for their opinions. The widespread behavior of the left-wing media was that until the right-wing media agreed with them they would be considered chauvinistic, supremacist, and generally full of prejudice (Guo, 2017). Right-wing media have focused on covering Trump's embarrassing moments and his failures to discourage citizens from voting for him. For example, you would turn on the news and see how the way Trump talks to his daughter is analyzed, how his past life is shown in an attempt to prove him untrustworthy, and how his swear words and the way he behaves are criticized . But even the right-wing media did not behave differently. The right-wing media would focus on Hillary Clinton's emails and how she hacked data and doesn't even deserve to be a presidential candidate. Even after Trump became president, the right-wing media didn't let the Clinton email scandal go, and it's a discussion that continues to this day, where the scandals of Clinton's past are now catching up with her due to the determination of right-wing media to destroy the credibility of left-wing media (Singman, 2017). As can be seen, American journalism has degraded itself to covering the attack of the right-wing media against the left-wing ones, and vice versa; It's hard to find real news anymore. What revolutionized American journalism is the advent of Internet media. Before Internet media, only news was broadcast on television and radio and printed in magazines and newspapers. Perhaps some people who were well connected could have gotten their news through word of mouth. However, thanks to Internet media, people don't need to rely on news sources they don't trust and can do extensive research to find the truth about a matter. Social media sites such as Facebook and Twitter have proven useful in spreading news that would otherwise never have been known. Whenever a terrorist attack, bombing, school shooting, or any other horrible and unfortunate situation occurs, these social media networks and their users can easily be relied upon to spread the news almost immediately. Internet media has forced companies and prominent public figures to be more aware of their actions and think twice before doing something embarrassing. Individuals can easily ruin reputations, or create them, through their comments, complaints and concerns which they can freely express across social media networks. One of the main reasons why Donald Trump won the 2016 presidential election is the Internet media. Instead of relying on how thevarious news sources would represent him to the people he was trying to get votes from, Trump took to Twitter to freely express his opinions and let citizens know what he truly wants to accomplish as president, and who he is against. However, Trump had a few instances of posting Tweets that damaged his reputation and made people think twice before voting for him, but overall society appreciated the honesty and unfiltered attitude of Trump (Alang, 2016). Trump also saved millions of dollars in free advertising for his campaign through effective self-promotion. Trump's actions took all news sources by surprise, and instead of focusing on the presidential election itself, news sources began reporting on how Trump is taking to Twitter to bolster his chances of becoming president. It was as if Trump was getting double the coverage and double the publicity without spending a single cent. While Hillary Clinton spent approximately 1,184.1 million on her presidential campaign, Trump spent only 616.5 million on his campaign, almost half of the spending made by Clinton (Allison, Rojanasakul, Harris & Sam, 2016). The low amount of spending Trump did on his campaign compared to Clinton's, despite his numerous trips across the country in a private jet and long hotel stays, continues to demonstrate how powerful Internet media is. However, Internet media is a platform that anyone has access to, so through the use of Internet media many people can be influenced by unfounded news. For example, Facebook uses an algorithm that does not filter fake news, and any news that is viewed the most is placed at the top of a “Trending Now” list that promotes fake news even more elaborately (van Es, 2017). For Internet media to be fully integrated into today's society, an effective measurement or detection system is needed that filters out news that would otherwise distract the public's attention from what is really happening. Many news sources are expanding their companies and businesses to include a website or online application where they can also share and deliver news from there. Social media networks should be able to differentiate unreliable news sources from credible ones. While many countries are envious of the United States and the freedoms it offers, most don't realize that there are other nations out there with better journalism systems, where journalists don't get threatened by their president. Finland, for example, is a nation that is repeatedly chosen as the best-rated nation for press freedom (Weaver, 2016). The case in which a Finnish journalist was attacked in April 2016 was headline news for numerous weeks; Finnish society sees such an act as a direct violation of the free and honorable journalism afforded to journalists in their country (Pisker, 2016). Freedom of the press and speech are strongly strengthened by the Finnish Constitution, as well as numerous laws and policies that support this freedom. The Finnish government focuses on building and maintaining the trust of its citizens, which it achieves by making all government documents public and ensuring there is a minimum level of corruption. You might wonder how both the United States and Finland have freedom of speech and press, but that Finland is what is recognized and characterized as a journalist's utopia. Finland aims to maintain a minimum level of corruption in its political proceedings. Although there are several.