No more peace!
James Lipton (2007-09-17)
The authors make note of viewers taking comfort in the “orderliness” of ceremonial media events. Obviously, this has to do with the notion of the scripted, which consists of a beginning, middle and end where viewers have a finite time period to watch an event wrapped up in a nice, neat package.
What’s more interesting, however, is the shift to broadcasting’s shock and awe tactics involving less ceremonial events. People love the fact that the possibility of something going wrong looms in the background. There is a real intrigue with those disasters in which nobody knows the outcome — not even media outlets.
Despite living in an era where terror and war are constantly on the minds of not just network producers but the layman alike, major disasters don’t appear to be more frequent now than 50 years ago. It merely seems what constitutes a “major disaster” has changed drastically over the years.
For example, why, during the 1994 NBA Finals does NBC cut away from its live broadcast to show O.J. Simpson’s white Ford Bronco chase? Why does Paris Hilton’s jail saga deserve 24-hour news coverage? Americans gawk from the side of the road at other people’s train wrecks. Because of this, networks play up any and all instances of the disastrous.
And this also seems to be a question of journalistic integrity. Despite making repeated comments on the air that Hilton’s situation did not warrant time during a broadcast, several media outlets continued with its coverage. Why? Nobody wants a live viewing experience anymore in which outcomes are predetermined, even if that means over-saturating coverage to uncover the most minute detail. The predetermined is saved for sit-coms and dramas during primetime.
This shift in broadcasting technique may come down to financial and ratings concerns, which the authors don’t necessarily address. While it is true networks want to recapture audience’s attention, doing so would create money and ratings and in today’s business world, it makes me wonder if that trumps journalistic integrity on some networks.
On the subject of war and terror, the public is meant to be immersed in a constant state of fear. In a way, this has led to the public’s desensitization of events. Think of the confusing, color-coded terror alerts the Bush administration trotted out post 9-11. Red, orange, yellow, blue and green are supposed to create fear or comfort, albeit terror “threats” were mostly raised. Certainly, the media’s portrayal of such events allows governments to “mobilize popular support for action against Evil,” as the authors put it.
That desensitization has meant networks must find new ways to grab our attention. There is no more shared experience in television broadcasting. With so many competing networks, everyone is trying to out dual each other.
It seems we’ve left an era behind that we can never go back to. Poignant ceremonial events just don’t hold the same weight they once did, particularly when the next monumental disaster is just one channel click and ratings boost away from occurring.
