When Abraham Lincoln was
assassinated, weeks passed before the whole country heard the news. The major
cities got word first. Those living in small towns and villages didn’t hear
about it until long after the funeral was over and Abe was pushing up daisies.
To my way of thinking, that was
the last time the “news cycle” matched humanity’s capacity to comfortably ingest
information.
When I was a wee lad, in the
long, long ago, newspapers were still the main source of accurate information
for Americans. Television networks aired the “nightly news” – 30-minute
overviews of the day’s top stories.
Then, like now, TV news painted only
with the broadest of brushes; folks got the details the following day,
when the newspapers hit the stands. Back then, both television and print media
employed lots of people: reporters, photographers, editors, fact checkers
galore, proofreaders, etc. They did this because they wanted to offer the
public a superior product. Even more importantly, they wanted to get the facts
right.
The public demanded it. Americans
were discerning and even ruthless when it came to getting their facts. Any news
outlet that “got it wrong” could count on in-baskets full of excoriating comments
and an immediate loss of readership and/or viewers.
Hence, most news outlets had
integrity. Yes, even the TV people. When America sat down to the
Huntley-Brinkley Report they could darn well count on Chet and David to deliver
The Facts. Over at CBS, Walter Cronkite’s stern, fatherly gaze spoke volumes
about his commitment to journalistic excellence.
This was news you could trust.
And when the Detroit Free Press, New York Times and the smaller town papers
like the one you’re reading now came out the next day, readers could count on
getting all the details the networks hadn’t had time to cover. The small town
papers also included news on which city councilman had done something
ridiculous, how many people had shown up for the Memorial Day Parade and a couple
photos of the Lion’s Club chicken barbecue.
It was an elegant system. All the
news you really needed was right there on your porch when you arrived home from
work.
Then came the Internet. The
Internet promised us limitless information. Virtually every fact known to
humankind was suddenly available at the flick of a Google. Naturally, most
folks used this miracle of modern technology to find web sites they wouldn’t
want their mothers to know about.
But once they’d grown tired of
that, they started looking for news. As a species, we like news. We like to
know what’s going on. We’re nosy. And the news outlets – to compete in this
brave new world – were forced to provide that news 24/7. So was born the 24/7
news cycle.
The problem is, news doesn’t
happen 24/7. Not real news. Not news that matters.
Watch CNN sometime if you think
I’m wrong here; after a few hours you’ll have seen the same four stories
regurgitated endlessly, with tiny new “factoids” inserted scattershot as they
become available. If no factoids surface, the anchors and reporters resort to
interviewing each other, just to keep the blah blah blah rolling along, to keep
viewers’ eyes glued to the screen.
Large newspapers – which are
these days hurtin’ for certain when it comes to finances – try to compete by
providing online versions of their publications. Problem is, they really are
hanging on by a thread, so they’ve done what all big corporations do when
things get tough: cut the salaries of top management and hire more and better
reporters.
Nah, I’m kidding; they fire all
their experienced writers, reporters and photographers and then hire stringers
to do the job for half the money. The fact they’re only getting one-third the
quality doesn’t seem to bother management at all. (If you live in a big city,
compare your town’s paper with one from 20, or even 10 years ago; you’ll see
what I mean. And yes, I’m talking to you, Grand Rapids.)
As to getting the facts straight?
P’shaw! Nobody expects that any more, do they?
And it’s only getting worse.
The Associated Press – one of the
most respected names in news gathering – now uses (and I’m not making this up)
robots to write thousands of its stories each year. Yes. Robots. (I assume it’s
actually more like some sort of computer writing program, but the robots thing
sounds more ominous.)
These robots churn out copy that
reads like this (actual excerpt with grammatical and spelling errors intact):
“Apple claimed ‘most personal device yet’ is non other than Apple Watch. iWatch
has a processor equivalent to 4S; graphic, connectivity & UI is just
awesome.”
You don’t have to be an English major
to know that article was written by either a machine or a roomful of chimps.
But so what? The important thing is, it’s NEWS!! And if you click on it, you’ll
be treated to a bunch of popup ads and the media outlet makes one-sixteenth of
a penny.
Everybody’s happy. The corporate
giant makes money, the advertisers get their products in front of your eyes,
and you … well, you get the feeling you’re actually “catching up” on the news.
Except you don’t get that feeling, do you? I know I don’t.
I get the feeling I’m being lead
around by the nose, desperately trying to locate a story that really matters
amongst a steaming pile of computer-generated literary refuse. It gets harder
every day.
For all I know, the story on the
Lincoln assassination is out there in the ether someplace. Given time, maybe
I’ll be able to wade through enough click-bait and popups to locate it.
I’m dying to find out who shot
Abe.
(616) 745-9530
No comments:
Post a Comment