Yes, I remember the exploding truck story. It’s just one entry in a long string of examples of agenda-driven journalism. And a point well made. Thanks for the reminder.
You know, I used to look to FoxNews as the only reasonably fair network, which targeted an intelligent audience seeking to become and remain informed. I’ve even given up on them now. From now on, I am only looking for news and commentary to internet sources and conservative print media (The Federalist, American Spectator, Human Events, etc.). And even they have to be scrupulously examined, for what they include (and fail to) in their reporting and opinion. We’re running out of reliable options here.
My eyes were finally opened to FoxNews’ degradation during the week of hurricane Frances/the Beslan school massacre . After that week, I sat down and paid even more careful attention to what they do -- and do not -- report, and how much air time they allow for ‘fluff’ pieces. The results are insulting. And I have come to the conclusion that, although their commentators tend to be heads and shoulders above those of any other news group (Britt Hume, Chris Wallace, and Charles Krauthammer ranking highest on that esteemed list), Fox, too – for reasons I can’t discern – neglects to report in any depth (and sometimes neglects to report at all) on events and issues about which we all desperately need to know.
One case in point (out of hundreds): On one of their news programs last week in which they have a ‘news from around the world’ segment they covered (1) a group of boys who were rescued after being trapped in a raging river because a heavy rainstorm hit them unawares and (2) some kind of unusual insect infestation somewhere in the world (I can’t even tell you where, the story was so un-riveting).
I sat there thinking that I can’t remember the last time I heard any reference at all to the human crisis that is occurring in Sudan. Christians (and virtually anyone else who isn’t a Sunni Muslim) are being slaughtered, tortured and sold into slavery by the millions in a type of scorched earth genocidal policy by the Sudanese government. Hastily dug mass graves are being filled faster than they can be dug. And the impotent (or, worse, indifferent) UN is refusing to step in –- or, at the very least, enact diplomatic and economic sanctions. If no one acts in behalf of the victims, and potential victims, of this holocaust, we could be looking at a genocidal tragedy whose black, dismal human-upon-human portrait is far more gruesome than the recent genocides in Rwanda and Bosnia.
Why are American news outlets (FoxNews included) completely oblivious to this human tragedy, and many, many other national and global events that should be a part of every Americans’ daily dose of information that will better help us comprehend where this country, and the world, are headed, and what our priorities need to be regarding the need for potential action in order to avert more human tragedies than we are already facing around the globe?
What is occurring in Sudan is simply a single, microcosmic example of human-on-human atrocities and injustices that are occurring all over the globe. Place those stories that are crying for at least occasional recognition on the scale with a momentary mosquito infestation or the rescue of a group of boys from a rain-swollen river. Who sat in a decision-making position somewhere in the upper echelon of Fox’s management and gave the mosquito story the nod? And why?
It's not that I want our lives infiltrated twenty-four hours a day with depressing stories of human misery. I relish uplifting stories about human compassion, or heroism, or victory over hardship, or good triumphing over evil, as much as anyone. But that's not what I'm talking about. Such inspirational, uplifting stories are being neglected as well. And we are being bombarded with meaningless, foundationless, often celebrity-focused, stories that have absolutely no relevance to the human condition.
Do the media decision makers ignore (either positive or negative) stories of human weight and import because they believe that the attention span of the average American can be measured in nanoseconds, so sixty-second fluff pieces are their only viable option anymore? Is it that they can’t be bothered to investigate deep or disturbing subjects, because they don’t believe heavy stories of monumental human importance will be of interest to the average viewer? Is it because they believe we prefer to be entertained rather than informed? Or is there some other more sinister reason for the media-wide blackout on events that are desperately calling to be publicized, investigated, and burned into the consciences of caring people?
The power wielded by those in decision-making positions in the mainstream media is unprecedented. They have the ability to virtually dictate those subjects with which the average American concerns himself. And there is a huge spectrum over which they can operate. They can inspire national outrage over the mass murders of innocents (as occurred in Russia two weeks ago, as is occurring daily in several African and Asian countries, or as occurs daily in American abortion clinics. They can fill us with a sense of pride and accomplishment by providing us a list of the miraculous successes that our troops and private contractors have achieved in rebuilding Iraq and providing a framework for historically unprecedented educational, self-government and standard of living opportunities for her people. Or they can, instead, occupy our grey matter with relatively inconsequential ‘news’ stories that would better be categorized as light entertainment for the non-inquiring mind.
I read a recent article entitled ‘Democracy for Dummies’ by AP national writer Jerry Schwartz in which he superficially described the uninformed nature of the average American voter. But then he negated the entire potential power of his premise by concluding that ‘It would be an overstatement to paint America as a confederacy of dunces; there are those who say we may not be a nation of civic superstars, but we know enough to get by.’
We ‘know enough to get by’? I suppose that depends on one’s definition of ‘getting by.’
In my (growing ever more cynical) opinion, ‘knowing enough to get by’ in a world in which the unprecedented human devastation being inflicted by madmen in many areas of the globe, and the successes of the heroes who are seeking to destroy or contain them, is remaining largely unrecorded by the international media, amounts to the most deadly form of personal indolence and irresponsibility this planet has ever witnessed.
The bottom line is that the majority of the American citizenry has devolved into a people who prefer to be spoon fed, in small tasty portions. Nothing terribly bitter. Nothing with an unpleasant after-taste. Sweet. Easily chewable. Easily digested. And our media dieticians are complying with pleasure, because such a menu suits their overall purposes just fine. It’s a symbiotic relationship if there ever was one. Too bad the resulting toxicity won’t be discovered by the masses until it’s too late to seek an antidote.
~ joanie
P.S. The bike race went well. Thanks for asking. :) I placed fourth out of forty-one in my age bracket (45-59), if you include men and women -- first out of nineteen among the women entrants. But I prefer to include both, so consider the fourth place finish the accurate one. :)
