Has Media Liberalism Fallen into the Realms of the Ridiculous?

well i have decided to be intelligent, i know this does not happen often (especially going to university here :-s...but one can try!)
anyway, i have just been reading the news and there is suggestion lying around that the British public are purposely being civilly disobedient. Now, being a member of the british public, this has interested me...i always like a bit of disobedience in my life ('oooer' you may say, but yes it is true). Now the disobedience is in the form of reality TV shows. various 'celebrities' or contestants are being kept into the shows via public votes despite not deserving to be there (you see it is all rather scandalous, and yes there are probably more important matters in the world) and this is being deemed as 'social disobedience'.
I may be being slightly ignorant here but don't the TV shows make money by having scandalous voting decisions? It may be suggested to the general public that we are the ones who are being disobedient but actually it is the TV companies themselves who are making money from corrupt voting systems, or various other means to keep certain contestants on their shows.
it is slightly far-fetched to describe civilians as the 'unruly' ones...we are not exactly fighting/revolting/desperately falling into the grasps of anarchy...we are simply voting to protect our right to comical television. Who really wants to see 'celebrities' prancing around on stage with some kind of talent behind them...we would much rather see them fall over. Who wants to hear angelic voices? the British public finds great pleasure in moaning and groaning over the appalling noises that fill our kitchens at dinner time whilst we watch the X Factor...we like to recognise bad singing so that we can pride ourselves with the knowledge that we too know failure when we see it. We vote-in failure to make ourselves feel better.

this is not civil disobedience...this is media control. We are buying in to our own control. the media are making even more money from calling us disobedient, we couldn't be disobedient if we tried!!!

In other news today, there is an article about philosophy. It is national philosophy day or something. Anyway, there is this one question posed to the general public…
‘should we kill healthy people for their organs?’
Now it may seem a bit strange but they did argue it really well. This is their explanation of this suggestion:
Suppose Bill is a healthy man without family or loved ones. Would it be ok to painlessly kill him if his organs would save five people, one of whom needs a heart, another a kidney, and so on? If not, why not?
Consider another case: you and six others are kidnapped, and the kidnapper somehow persuades you that if you shoot dead one of the other hostages, he will set the remaining five free, whereas if you do not, he will shoot all six. (Either way, he'll release you.)
If in this case you should kill one to save five, why not in the previous, organs case? If in this case too you have qualms, consider yet another: you're in the cab of a runaway tram and see five people tied to the track ahead. You have the option of sending the tram on to the track forking off to the left, on which only one person is tied. Surely you should send the tram left, killing one to save five.
It got me thinking. Would I condemn the killing of a healthy human in order to save five others? Maybe I would if it would mean killing like a rapist or a murderer…should this be sanctioned? What happens to people in America when they are charged with the death penalty? What happens to their organs? In my opinion these should definitely be used to save lives…but would people want the organs of a murderer?
People who want to kill themselves, what about them? If assisted suicide was sanctioned then many lives could probably be saved from the sacrifice of a few, but I’m sure assisted suicide will not be sanctioned anytime soon. Assisted euthanasia is no good…the majority of these people want to die because of illness etc.
I don’t think we should kill healthy people randomly…this would probably turn into some sort of organ donation nightmare with deaths occurring left right and centre. I don’t think it would be right to kill a lonely person, just on the basis that they are lonely. A decision like this would lead to uproar and doubtlessly some sort of ‘civil disobedience’.

With all that in mind I think I can safely say that the British news is largely diverse. People complain about the chaotic, disobedient and excessively inappropriate behaviour of the ‘television voter’, while others consider taking the lives of innocent human beings because they see sacrifice as being a natural process of mankind not a decision made under extreme pressure and animal instinct. In the end it is all for one and one for all, this is how we were made to survive. It’s all about personal choice – we vote for what we think is right at the time and we vote for what we think is right for us and what we think we can deal with, no matter whether it is right or wrong.
Has the world gone completely mad???!