Ответьте пожалуйста даю 15 баллов

The media does not play an important role in my life as I'm yet too young to be stirred (беспокоиться о) by any political processes either in my country or worldwide, which mass media is mostly about.
Yes, I do: many adults love to be fooled into believing in what the mass media says to them, in other words, many adults don't like to think with their own head. That happens either due to the lack of time (parents are busy providing / caring for their offspring (потомство)), or due to the specific aspects of the mentality, which was, in my opinion, distorted in the period of the USSR when people had but dux (лишь главарь) with his retinue (окружение) to take care of all of the plebs' (простой народ) problems, guiding it through the rigours (невзгоды) of life.
I prefer getting news via the Internet as there I am free to read any source I want and find the most appropriate ones. For example, if I come across a media outlet with an inappropriate style, I'd choose to have it out of my 'Featured' list forever, whereas while watching news on TV, especially on well-established (знаменитые) channels, there is no way I could filter out the stylistically incorrect news items or tart-tongued (острый на язык) talking heads (водящие).
I do not read paper newspapers; nowadays progressive newspapers are online, which, however, does not relieve their readers of paying for them. In rare cases, such as The Washington Post, the visitor is free to read a limited number of articles a month, which is nice.
I usually listen to the radio when on my way home or to the supermarket.
If by 'we' it's meant 'people', I would not agree; there are a lot of agencies which cover positive or neutral events, e.g. Hi-News or Geek.
I have studied history and, what is more, read 1984, which gives me the opportunity to draw a conclusion regarding the pace of events in general and asses the probability of them being either positive or negative. I won't be convinced that there could possibly be not a single daunting news item there. But, if it should be, it would be nice.
It depends on the news outlet.
Showing dead bodies on air might look disgusting, and for dead persons and for their families it may be offensive; moreover, I cannot imagine nude bloody pieces of dead people appear on TV. It is not unethical but off-putting. If one wants to see 'raw' data, they should go look it up, it is there guaranteed.
Paparazzi take photos of celebrities to sell them to news agencies to earn money.
I am not interested in politics much. I really do think that politicians use the media to make folk (люд) vote for them. In the US, for example, such a game has been on for ages; today, Democrats and Republicans are fighting over every bit of power in Congress and such stories as 'Hillary Clinton's private email correspondence gone public' are commonplace (повсеместный), which sells short (подрывает авторитет) the person in limelight (человек, о котором говорится в новинки).
The main advantage of the Internet is the ability of the user to get the information from the horse's mouth (из первых уст).

О проекте

Ответьте пожалуйста даю 15 баллов

Добро пожаловать!