All Paris, all the time! It screams at us in the newspapers, magazines and through the television and radio, like a "Who" concert where Pete Townsend has something to prove. Who is to blame? That damn, worthless mainstream media, that’s who.
They have ignored Iraq, Gonzo-gate, the everyday corruption of the Bush administration and Congressional Republicans, the incompetence/weakness of Democrats and their leaders, out of control energy prices, global warming, a surge in violent crime, a rich get richer economic system, American religious fundamentalism, voter disenfranchisement and an inadequate health care system.
Well, actually they haven’t ignored those things.
As a matter of fact, they have covered those things, some to a greater extent – others to a lesser, quite a bit in the last several years. The problem is that it hasn’t been the kind of coverage YOU want.
In the interest of full disclosure, I must admit that I am a member of the MSM. I will also tell you that I am a frustrated member of the MSM because I work very had to approach every story with immediacy, objectivity, fairness and accuracy. But that carries little weight. A working journalist today has to spend as much time worrying about the rating/circulation numbers of the news organization as much as the quality of the work produced. Therein lies the problem.
Why are the "all news" cable channels (and, to a lesser degree, the major papers) going nuts over some over-hyped, under-dressed, malnourished, self-promoting, immature, talent-less, undeserving, and chronically OVER-COVERED celebu-skank?!? Eyeballs. That’s right. Because Nielsen and Arbitron ratings and circulation numbers have eclipsed the quality of journalism that provided them in importance to those who run the news organization, you are stuck with Paris Hilton’s legal travails, Lindsay Lohan’s most recent bender, and the latest missing white girl case.
This is the problem with the mainstream media today. We are changed with generating numbers (ratings/circulation) first, quality journalism second (or even third behind "buzz"). And the people responsible for this phenomenon are the brainiacs who pay Katie Couric 15-million dollars a year. Not because she’s a top-flight journalist, but because people LIKE her. These "news" executives would throw Edward R. Murrow under the bus if Jerry Springer came calling.
Which story do you think Betty-Jo Homemaker in Omaha, Nebraska is going to watching -- Paris in the Pokey or the suffering in Darfur? You know the answer.
And it’s not just about "info-tainment." Politics also are driven by the rabid ratings monkey. In the MSM, you aren’t required to be "fair and balanced" as much as you are required to present both "sides". Look at the global warming "debate" or the evolution "controversy". The MSM has to give equal time to those who are well beyond the fringe of those issue in an effort not to alienate anyone. So, in a story about global warming, the MSM report needs the quote/soundbite from the global warming opponent who plays up the DOUBT even thought there is none. Why? Because you can’t risk losing an eyeball, even if they disagree with the accepted facts. Betty-Jo Homemaker doesn’t want to hear that the Earth is more than four-billion years old and that her ancestors swung from vines and ate bananas. An ignorant eyeball is STILL an eyeball.
Until ratings are subtracted from the equation, the MSM is will be completely beholden to ratings/circulation numbers and the quality of their product will suffer. The only alternative is for the viewing/reading public to choose hard, substantive news over fluff. And God knows that isn’t going to happen anytime soon. Americans will ALWAYS choose MTV and Fox over NPR and the Discover Channel. If you are frustrated with the fact that the MSM spent more time focused on the "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth" than the "Downing Street Memo", you have only the highest brass in the new media to blame. If you want to hear more about the new chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff than Paris Hilton’s time in the joint, blame the people who decided money is more important than meaning.
I intend to have more say on this subject, but I will only ask you to consider this question: what are you watching/reading today that furthers the intellectual progress of your fellow Americans?