Through Murky Waters: Media drama queens
The public loses when news doubles as entertainment
By Alex Sirney, senior writer
Posted on September 21, 2006

The media has gotten very good at dropping bombshells on an unsuspecting public — there’s a new crisis, tragedy or emergency situation. The business of alarm has become the focus of the media, and it’s this business mentality that drives down the general public.

Anyone can see that the 24-hour world of journalism has become prone to sensationalizing stories that are attention-grabbers, broadcasting them constantly with ever more banal updates — look at the Iraq war as a mega-time sink, or at the over-dramatic response to every vicious crime as a minor attention-getter.

Lurid stories get grabbed by all the networks, covered, updated and finally beaten to death on national television while important issues are ignored. As tragic as the JonBenet Ramsey case was, it is far less tragic or socially relevant than the persistence of poverty in this country, the spread of AIDS or any of hundreds of social issues — and the JonBenet case was still being covered a month ago.

Admittedly, some of these stories have been written, but not given nearly the saturation of coverage as the ones pop culture has produced. Now it falls to the responsible media consumer to look carefully at the product and try to figure out what isn’t part of the package. While the media is selling us war, propaganda, sensational murders and celebrity babies, what are we missing? What stories aren’t being covered because they won’t sell as well?

The conspiracy side, of course, says that many important and relevant stories are intentionally overlooked so that the public never finds out about them. It’s easier and more profitable to sell the entertaining scandals, violence and sex that everyone loves without ever demanding anything but a tapioca mind and willing wallet from the view.

An informed public raises too many questions about why things happen and the answers may end up shaking the foundations of power. Instead, the media gives what the public thinks it wants — entertainment and overwhelming coverage of the few sensational stories available.

This process happens after every major event — even the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks and the war on terrorism are over-covered to the point of desensitization. The same thing can only be said so many times before the public response is “I don’t care” or “I can’t take this anymore.” At this point, many people would accuse this uncaring public of irresponsibility, but it’s the news media that deadened its emotions and responses to the point of apathy.

The moment the choices about what and how much to cover are based on attracting viewers rather than reporting the news is the moment the public starts to lose its battle for relevant information.

Of course, the real tragedy is that the public doesn’t turn on C-SPAN instead of CNN because the media is perfectly in tune with what the viewers want. Someday, maybe the public will realize that there is more to life than bloody pictures and scant analysis.

Until then, it falls to the media to behave responsibly. They make the choice every day about what to cover and, if the public is to remain informed, they need to stop selling themselves as entertainment.

Alex Sirney is a senior anthropology/SMAD major who welcomes feedback at sirneyac.