E By David Jansen
ssentially every news story released this summer was frightening or depressing. Perhaps it is yet another symptom of a post-Sept. 11 mentality, where we now share personal turmoil on a daily basis with the rest of the developed world. The concept of reporting stories to inform audiences of lurking dangers is not new, nor is it unwelcome: The public needs to be aware of potential threats on its health or safety. However, the continued barrage of almost every news story reporting on bleak events has a tendency to keep me indoors.
My earliest memories of media-generated paranoia came from viewing the made-for-TV movie “The Day After,” which depicted a fictional account of World War III. This fear drove me to watch the news almost every evening until the Cold War ostensibly ended and the potential threat was not as great. I do not believe it is a coincidence that as a young boy I made it a point to diligently watch the reports on the status of the Cold War. Fear drives news sales.
Since the Cold War ended in 1991, almost every year can be defined by a big news story that really has little effect aside from providing fodder for water cooler conversations. I’m not saying that there weren’t special reports concerning monsters such as Slobodan Milosevic and the ever-present Saddam Hussein. I’m also not disregarding the school shooting epidemics and mad cow disease as serious stories that concerned audiences. However, throughout the 1990s and into the 21st century, audiences were given sensationalized tabloid personalities such as O.J. Simpson, Monica Lewinsky and Elian Gonzalez to chew on. News organizations fixated on these over-arching stories, which seemed to overall dwarf important issues. News coverage was losing credibility in its lack of relevant material. Until Sept. 11, that is.
Before Sept. 11, 2001, shark attacks were the major stories used to attract people to their living rooms, snuggled safely next to the television and away from the dangerous outside world. Of course, this story had little consequence except its accordance with the 25th anniversary of “Jaws.” Suddenly, airplane hijackings kept tourists from venturing abroad to distant lands, while anthrax scares kept people from exploring the mailbox at the end of the driveway. What else do we have to do except vegetate indoors with both the television and computer on?
News organizations reported amazing increases in ratings and sales after Sept. 11. I remember when the AP/Reuters ticker was introduced on the bottom of our television newscasts. I felt satisfied that I was receiving as much adequate up-to-the-minute information as possible. As time has passed, I feel the novelty and effectiveness of things like the ticker and news graphics enveloped by a waving American flag have worn off: I don’t like having information smacking me across the face at all times. The forced urgency characterizing 24-hour news programming makes the “news alert” seems banal. Throughout the past summer, the public has been swept downstream with stories of kidnappings, disease and war. Even escapist venues such as baseball have been plagued by impeding dissolution.
Perhaps I am nostalgic and irritated about how things in our country since the fall of 2001. I want a variety of fresh stories to lead the top of the hour, instead of seeing a map of the United States, where the crimson states represent those affected by West Nile virus. I continue to bring up the virus scenario because that story reflects how the news has been reported during the past six months. The disease itself is known to infect a small percentage of mosquitoes, which in turn infect an even smaller percentage of humans, and finally only a very small percentage of those people become sick or die. In other words, there is really little cause for concern, but make sure to stay tuned to find out the latest pertinent developments about this “epidemic.”
Tragic news stories seem to fall on someone else’s misfortunes, while most of us remain unscathed. I realize that information dissemination is a major business and these companies’ sustenance comes from ratings due to strategic programming. I simply believe that regardless what “theme” news organizations decide to choose for the upcoming sweeps season, people will watch. We need to be informed, but we also need information that can help us make a difference beside staying indoors. This is our world, and it is our right to protect it. Unfortunately, we are generally given only the problem and rarely offered a solution. My solution: Read the newspaper.
