I wrote an 'article' here on FR about the obsession with Natalie Holloway and shark attack stories, earlier in the summer. And the crux was this: the only people that really control and regulate how much time news departments and hosts spend on topics such as this is us.
If no one was watching Van Susteren, she wouldn't devote much time to this. Stories like this are fueled by viewership and the only people that can be held culpable in weirdo fascination with these stories are the people watching. The hosts are going to go where the ratings are and as long as there's an audience for this stuff (and a big one, at that) then hosts will continue to devote whole segments and indeed HOURS to this type of story.
"The hosts are going to go where the ratings are and as long as there's an audience for this stuff (and a big one, at that) then hosts will continue to devote whole segments and indeed HOURS to this type of story."
Exactly. If people would watch, they'd broadcast paint drying on a fence, or grass growing. The only thing the tv people care about is production costs, and viewership. It is how they make money.
I agree. Since I'm not a tabloidphile, I never watch this crap. The Discovery Channel, the Western Channel, or War Stories, and M*A*S*H are my primary choices. Otherwise a Tom Clancy-type book.