It's amazing what the media still has time to cover amidst making daily events seem like looming crises that always need an international response. This morning I read the kind of article I wish there were more of, even though it's not academic, it's not about anything particularly important, and some might even call it worthless entertainment.
It's about a new species of frog ( http://www.cnn.com/2012/03/17/us/new-york-frog-species/index.html?hpt=hp_bn2) in New York City. It's so new it doesn't even have a name yet. Maybe what drew me to it was the picture of the frog (In enjoy animals, but I doubt it). Maybe it was the fact that I like to read and that a story about a heretofore unknown amphibian had more length and depth to it than a similar story on the same website about the presidential primary. Maybe I just like it when researchers and scientists are actually quoted in mainstream media articles.
Or, maybe, it's just because every once in a while a reader needs a break. I read news for at least an hour or so just about every day; I prescribe to the popular illusion that it somehow keeps me better informed. however, when I wake up in the morning, I have to admit that I'm just not in the mood to read about the current status of all existing global crises and the emergence of 34 more overnight. Something that struck me when we were reviewing the chapter on covering crises in the media was the familiarity with that kind of coverage: wild speculation and rumor, constant reporting on even the smallest of facts, drawing on a plethora of experts with surprisingly little knowledge of the developing situation, temporarily dropping all coverage of the first crisis when the second one starts.
Wait a minute. I thought that was normal reporting, even in online print media.
Well, nowadays it is, I guess. And after a while the crisis mentality just bores me (ironically). Crisis after crisis desensitizes the mind to the real importance and significance of developing trends and events. But more importantly, it just annoys people. You know what doesn't annoy me? Reading about the discovery of a new species of frog in New York City. And, given the choices, maybe it'll even run for president this year.
Such is the nature of events-based journalism. However, this style of journalism gives us day-by-day, hour-by-hour coverage of the trends, making it easier to find and prove them. Mind you, I am not defending this type of journalism, and I certainly do not think that it is the most useful form thereof. However, I do suggest that, annoyance aside, events-based and crisis-upon-srisis journalism has its own role, its own place.
ReplyDeleteI think you have a point about the fact that crisis and the normal findings of reporters and media outlets annoy someone. If there is one side to the story (support), there is always another side (annoyance or frustration). Obviously we all need some sort of outlet ( I am pretty sure I have mentioned on previous blog posts that I am guilty of turning on the Kardashian's rather than turning on the news), because we all watch depressing story after depressing story and sometimes reading about a frog is just a heck of a lot better to read.
ReplyDelete