shwew Clients all over the state were screaming cause I did nothing but read. Jurrasic Park, Congo, Eaters of the Dead, etc. In the summer of 1992 I sat down at my workbench in the garage with Andromeda Strain and did not get up again until 4 books later. There comes to be a perception-convenient to the media-that nothing is, in the end, knowable for sure.
The interminable chains of speculation paves the way to litigation about breast implants, hysteria over Y2K and global warming, articles in The New Yorker about currents of death, and a variety of other results that are not, by any thoughtful view, good things to happen. Compromise is much easier from relatively central positions than it is from extreme and hostile, conflicting positions: Greenpeace Spikers vs the Logging Industry. At the very least, these food fights obscure the recognition that disputes are resolved every day. 
There is some evidence that the television food fights not only don’t represent the views of most people-who are not so polarized-but they may tend to make resolution of actual disputes more difficult in the real world.
Endless presentation of uncertainty and conflict may interfere with resolution of issues. But my divorce is surely not vital breaking news. It’s sort of flattering, even though they got it wrong. I even watched a scroll of my own divorce roll by for a couple of days on CNN. Whatever the Queen mother’s story may be, it is not a crisis. Witness the interminable scroll at the bottom of the screen about the Queen Mother’s funeral. So there is a tendency to hype urgency and importance and be-there-now when such reactions are really not appropriate. Without a crisis, the talk soon degenerates into debate about whether the refs should have used instant replay on that last football game. 
Crisis in the German mark! Uh-oh! Look out! Crises unite the country, draw viewers in large numbers, and give something to speculate about. Most speculation is not compelling because most events are not compelling-Gosh, I wonder what will happen to the German Mark? Are they going to get their labor problems under control? This promotes the well-known media need for a crisis.
“Crisisization” of everything possible. Not every show features the Crossfire-style food fight, but it is a tendency on all shows. The fact that it’s only talk makes drama and spectacle unlikely-unless the talk becomes heated and excessive. So, now they’re speculating… so what? What is wrong with it? They haven’t been for most or recorded history. Now, nowhere is it written that the media need be accurate, or useful. Media exists in the eternal now, this minute, this crisis, this talking head, this column, this speculation. The audience does not remember yesterday, let alone last week, or last month. Even though the speculation is correct only by chance, which means you are wrong at least 50% of the time, nobody remembers and therefore nobody cares. No deadlines, no footage to edit, no editors…nothing! Just talk. No reporters in different cities around the world, no film crews on location. Just get the talking host, book the talking guests-of which there is no shortage-and you’re done! Instant show. 
Speculation requires no research, no big staff. And speculation shows are the cheapest thing you can put on television, They’re almost as cheap as running a test pattern. So now let’s consider the advantages of speculation from a media standpoint. I myself speculate that media has turned to speculation for media’s own reasons. If speculation is worthless, why is there so much of it? Is it because people want it? I don’t think so.
0 kommentar(er)
