Tweet
One of my least favorite media criticism dodges revolves around the idea that, though TV and newspaper pundits are powerful opinion leaders with massive megaphones through which they can amplify any point of view they choose, they are simultaneously powerless to resist the tastes of the public and must slavishly follow the directions of their reader and viewer masters.
As this Pew study points out, BULLSHIT:
In the week of March 21-27, for example, half (50%) of the respondents were still following the aftermath of the Japanese earthquake very closely, but media coverage had plunged to 15% from 57% the week before. That was also the case with the Tucson shooting when coverage dropped to 17% (the week of January 17-23) from 57% the week before, while news interest stayed very high, with 45% saying they were still following the story very closely.
Major weather events generated substantial coverage in the media in 2011, but even then not at the levels registered by the public. Coverage of the deadly Joplin Missouri tornado filled 22% of the newshole from May 23-29, but a full 45% of the public said they were following that story very closely. In a more dramatic divergence, the blizzards that blasted the Midwest the week of January 31-February 6 accounted for 8% of the newshole while almost half (45%) of the public were paying very close attention to them.
In other words, the people in charge of deciding what goes on your front page and leads the nightly news were already on to a retrospective of celebrity nipples while their audience was all, “erm, if you don’t mind, we’d still like to see more about this important thing even after the obligatory ‘put your pennies in the can at work to send six bucks to a relief agency’ fundraiser is over, thanks much.”
Yet you have these pieces about “story fatigue,” generally occurring around the time that producers and managers are worrying about the cost of keeping expensive correspondents in dangerous places, that make it sound like American news consumers are just desperate ADD crackheads who’d rather hear about Casey Anthony and WHICH MASCARA COULD KILL YOU TUNE IN TONIGHT TO FIND OUT than about Real Important World Events. Which means, of course, that those in charge of the news can once again blame their customers for being stupid, rather than blaming themselves for being lazy.
A.
17 Comments
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Allison!
“Story fatigue” translates into “doing real news coverage is expensive and might cut into the CEO’s bonus.”
Ahem. The link to celebrity nipples failed to deliver on its promise. perhaps you should pay more attention to the important parts… of the story, I mean.
So true. “And now the Corporate News from our corporate sponsors: The things WE want you to watch.” Followed by 12 hours of infommercials and repeats. Slackers.
I love the Internet! Citizen reporting and cutting edge correspondents have it all over the corporate boys.
Good one, Allison!
I really don’t think there enough celebrity nipple stories.
I was in the cafe today with the WSJ and I didn’t want to read some stories because felt like Homework, but surprisingly they were well written and slightly insightful. I realized that I get bored by the hack writing and the standard formats that don’t tell me anything new. That shit would bore anyone. And since the producer know that is what they often produce they decide to move on to the next formula story.
Wow, kind of slow tonight.
Here is my lasted issue about the Fox Corporation and their writers.
I don’t think they should be getting the benefits of journalists and I don’t think Fox should be getting the benefits of press.
I wrote this letter to the EVP of Fox PR to ask them about these errors.
Let me know what you think. I’m working a high level issue here and want to figure out more ways to make it work.
p://my.firedoglake.com/spocko/2011/12/16/dear-irena-briganti-anyone-ever-fired-for-on-screen-errors-at-fox/
I remain convinced, convinced, I tell you!, that Sarah Palin’s popularity owes everything to the demographic she’s always appealed to, middle-aged and elder white, conservative males. They’re the ones who run just about all the newsrooms and they “saw stars” when she appeared. She has no appeal to most of the country, but boy, that demographic thinks she’s so-o-o-o hot! It became obvious when we saw so much of Palin and at the same time, poll numbers on her that just plain stunk.
You’ve got it, to a degree. “If it bleeds, it leads,” is the real reason.
Go back to Zappa and the Mothers, “If another woman driver gets machine-gunned from her seat, we’ll send some joker with a Brownie and you’ll see it all complete.”
As Don Henley said, we all love “Dirty Laundry.”
And the political parties have been throwing the red meat for decades.
It’s the Roman Empire, bread and circuses, all over again.
Just don’t run out of gladiators, or Christians.
Honi soit qui mal y pense ou qui regarde les media du mainstream.
But Wonkette swooned and FP’d her when she became governor.
When I was your age TV news was only 15 minutes.
On the Radio too, Aitch…? ;-)
Hey Spocko! Nice article at:
http://my.firedoglake.com/spocko/2011/12/16/dear-irena-briganti-anyone-ever-fired-for-on-screen-errors-at-fox/
Your link above @5 is broken.
Nah, it was maybe 30 seconds. 25 if they didn’t have to say ‘Nikita Khrushchev’. *g*
On edit: Except for Paul “I have news!” Harvey. *g*
*heh* Or any other Ruskie name…! ;-)
Nikita did have a way of making his point heard, with shoes even…!
I’ve got some Diamonds and Rust on tap…!
.
Amen. The American MSM are the laziest people in the world.
One of my “faves” of the MSM is when they start a story with “everyone’s talking about so and so” when it’s really just the MSM who is talking about it, and they’re going to shove it down our collective throats whether we want it or not.