modern media feeds on sensation and not substance

today's media is just feeding on sensation and not substance...media in today's world is not doing its work properly...

With this debate there exists a problem, because the phrase "modern media" has two possible interpretations.

The first interpretation is relatively new forms of media, such as blogs, Youtube or even Debate.com; Under this interpretation, the topic can be considered false, because there exist many instances of substantive content being relayed through these channels. An example of such substance in new media is the postings on scienceblogs.com, which contains various blogs mantained by scientists, who offer informed and witty observations on current affairs. Also given the number of essays and textbooks made avaliable through new media channels, we can safely say that the new forms of media feed on substance as well as sensationalism.

The second interpretation is the current status of mass media, which, again, has a lot of substantial content. Shows like The Daily Show offer biting satire with a lot of political content, we also have many informative documentaries.

There is substantial content today, and there is substantial content in todays channels.

My opponent appears to have forfeited, probably because she was engrossed in substantial modern media content.

My opponent has forfeited the debate, thereby conceding that there is substantial media content, I win, vote accordingly :)