Over winter break, I fell into a normal, domestic routine that comes with time spent at home. No cable means I am woefully dependant on network television to fulfill my entertainment needs.
As I lazed around the homestead, I watched as The Price is Right gave way a solid three hour late-afternoon block of courtroom judge shows, followed by my now-close friends, Ellen, Phil, and of course, The Big O. By six o’clock the evening news was a welcome refuge of substance and information.
Or, it was.
As major cold front moved eastward a couple weeks ago, the night’s top stories became an avalanche of warnings about EXTREME TEMPERATURES, and SUB-ZERO CONDITIONS. With an urgent and serious tone, newscasters mentioned “artic air” coming in from Canada with the same solemn manner usually reserved for the Hamases and Al-Quedas of the world.
Two local news outlets even sent reporters to the frosty peak of Mt. Washington to document the fact that – yes – it really is colder on top of a mountain.
Now, I understand the weather is a very real concern for many people. Plunging temperatures can be dangerous for those who work outside, or the elderly. But the disproportionate amount of attention being given to the earth’s normal cycle of seasons started to get to me after a few days.
Here’s a breaking news story for you. It’s Maine, it’s between October and May, and it’s going to be cold.
As the editor of The Free Press, my weekly job includes deciding what is, and what is not newsworthy. Believe me when I say that a lot goes on around campus that doesn’t make it into the paper, but being constrained by page size, and resources forces us to make such decisions.
So I find it frustrating when events are blow out of proportion just to make for an exciting lead story, or something juicy to mention in between prime time shows. “Tonight at 11! Extended coverage of a thermometer steadily dropping!”
It’s this sort of elastic definition of “news” that can alienate the viewer, and stop them from wanting to tune in. Who is gong to trust the news judgment of a station that believes a demonstration on turning boiling water into snow belongs further up in a newscast than the latest reports out of Gaza?
If this problem only extended as far as the weather, I might be able to cope. However, “news” can also sometimes mean borderline creepy voyeurism, specifically in the case of our nation’s newest first kids. Their first day at a new school must have been hard enough adjustment, but to be followed by professional “journalists,” who are between three and seven times your age, capturing your every move on camera and broadcasting your lunch menu on the nightly news, borders on ridiculous.
News in this country has always been decidedly America-centric. The country’s nightly news programs give little coverage to events around the globe compared to other media organizations. But I refuse to believe that the time spent broadcasting a forlorn Malia, head pressed to the window as her armored SUV rolled into school, could not have been better spent on.well, anything really.
A distinction needs to be made between news and entertainment masquerading as important information. It’s a tough sell because cut -and-dried facts are usually not as riveting as exploitative, glitzy entertainment. But when the two intersect it degrades the value of important information. And while it might give the people what they want, it certainly does not give them what they need
Thanks for reading,
Matt Dodge