what is this? good? bad? examples? specifically bush/iraq? i notice this in local tv news... "aspirin will kill you. stay tuned for the low down" definitely sensationalism, ja?
Sensationalism is simply telling a story, news or otherwise, in such a way as to "excite" the listener in some way. In the case of newspapers, for exampe, they use big, bold headlines (sensationalism) in order to entice people to buy the paper. Is it good or bad? Well, that's pretty subjective. For the newspapers, it's good cause it sells more papers. For the public, it can be both, depending on the slant or the method of sensationalizing the news article. As to the Iraqi war, I think most news agencies sensationalize most stories because the public has already been conditioned for it - they expect it. Another prime example of sensationalism is how news agencies might present racial issues. For example, during the New Orleans disaster, it was sensationalism to show the "horrid" plight of the blacks ...yet they gave us almost no news about the outlying areas that were equally devastated, yet the population was mostly, if not all, white. The blacks were screaming and yelling, looting, etc, which made good, exciting news .....the whites were taking charge of their own situations, picking up their lives and doing almost no complaining. See? The stories about white people being ruined wasn't very "exciting". One exciting headline that's always good is ......"Aspirin May Kill You" ...in giant, bold, black letters. Yet in the article, we find that the world "may" shows that aspirin "may" kill you ...if you take 400 tons of it in one gulp!! Sensationalism! Baron Max
Racism is always good for appealing to sensations. There is the obvious story of poor blacks trapped on rooftops and wading through fetid waters to (quite rightly, I suppose) rouse the righteous anger of the black community. But there is also the mostly unspoken appeal to the emotions of whites, with the narrative of inner-city-blacks-on-the-rampage-in-a-lawless-hell, or the helpless-blacks-requiring-white-help-narrative. It's also a hell of a lot easier for the media to cover the concentrated anguish of a city than for them to fan out across the Gulf Coast trying to get the story and get back before deadline. Some sources have covered it pretty well, though. This American Life did some real good work a few weeks ago (http://www.thislife.org/ra/299.ram among others). What evidence do you have for this farily racist assertion?
Virtually every single news story that came out later (a few days later) about the outlying areas of the hurricane ...the areas of Mississippi, Alabama, etc. Whenever a white person was interviewed, there was always the comments like, "Well, we just have to pick up and rebuild." or "We're all just thankful that no one was killed.", etc. The coverage in the newspaper was also the same/similar. It seems to me that the majority of the ones who were screaming, protesting and complaining were the blacks. And the news media played it up big time! Sensationalism ...with the added benefit for the media of racial conflicts in the days to come ...perfect for them to make more money. Baron Max
Could be. I wonder if a big part of it is the city / rural comparison. That is, rural people have more and better resources for dealing with disaster, while city people tend to expect more governmental services to manage their everyday lives. When everything goes to hell the city folks don't have the resouces, skills or experience for dealing with it. Almost by definition those with the ability, money, transport and suitable destination to get out in fact did get out, leaving those who might be disposed to see themselves as helpless vicitims. Media sensationalism did the rest - looked for the story that would please their corporate overlords and push the public's buttons. In my mind, 99.9% of all news is no longer about informing the public and creating a better citizenry. It's a form of entertainment. Oddly enough, we won't be entertained by stories of people toughing it out and persevering through adversity without complaint until things get really, really bad all over. Even fearmongering is a form of entertainment, in a way. People with miserable lives would rather be afraid of anthrax or terrorists or cancer or illegal aliens than the threats that they can actually do something about. The ones that might actually kill them, like being grossly obese or living with an abusive husband, are traded in for mythic-scale threats.
In the days after Katrina, Baron, I remember several images of black men and women pulling other people out of the flooded areas of New Orleans in little plastic tubs. Some of the people the black men and women were helping were white. Some were black. I saw several black men and women helping others. I saw them trying to do what they could to help. Then, I saw a multitude of people, black, white, brown, yellow, old, and young, stranded, with no food or water, for days, nowhere to sleep, nowhere to shit or piss. I slowly saw these people lose hope because noone was prepared to help them. I also saw some people looting. Boy, was that sensational. Just horrible. Funny, I never saw who was doing the sniping though. I wonder if they were whites or blacks. I'll never know, I guess. Finally, and most importantly, I saw what the heads of the media conglomerates thought I should see, for one reason or another. I saw what they wanted me to see. That goes beyond sensationalism. Depending on what else happened, that could be censorship. I don't know and probably never will. The coverage could have been slanted, could have been slightly skewed so that we got the impression that certain people wanted us to get. Again, I don't know and may never know.
Oh, sure ...I did, too, in the initial news reports only. And I didn't mean to imply that blacks didn't help or that some black families didn't pull up their boot straps and get to work rebuilding. My post was about the news coverage itself ...they didn't interview or show that kind of behavior, they showed only the worst of the worst. Which is .....sensationalism! And it's also sensationalism to show ONLY blacks in dire plight, and that, in my opinion, was slanted/biased reporting so as to home in on the racial issues, which in turn, brought out the worst in all of us - racists and non-racists alike! Exactly the same conditions existed in outlying areas, but those people picked up their boots and went to work doing something about it. They didn't wait for FEMA or anyone else, they did it themselves. The reason you didn't see any of that is because it was NOT sensational, it would not evoke horror, etc in the viewer. Some of the towns/cities all along the coast were desvastated, but the news only showed the horror stories, not the others. Well, we do know now ...because since the "sensationalism" died out, the news began to show some of the stories, scenes of the disaster. It was no less than NO, but no one was whining and crying and screaming for FEMA or someone else to do something for them. They were doing it themselves, without much, if any, outside help. Yes, we do know NOW ...but most people aren't paying much attention anymore ...because it's not sensational! Baron Max
I'm glad to hear you say that. However, later in your last post, you seem to contradict yourself in these two paragraphs: I assert that the conditions between New Orleans and the outlying areas were nowhere near the same. Downtown NO was flooded. Flooded for days, weeks. It's kind of hard to pick up your bootstraps when you see your boots floating away in water over your head that is polluted with raw sewage, oil, gas, and chemicals. It's kind of hard to start clearing away the wreckage when the wreckage in under 5 or 6 feet of this polluted water. Would you agree? I saw very little flooding outside of New Orleans. I agree whole-heartedly. They were all doing it themselves, the best that they knew how. I can't imagine how bad it would be to go through what they did. But I can tell you this. I would have much rather been in Alabama or Mississippi than downtown New Orleans. Do you agree? P.S. Good to see you again.
Well, not the same, of course, but in the outlying areas, most of the structures were simply gone! Many/most of them didn't have anything like the "Whatever-the-Hell-it-was-called" dome to live in! And worse, no one, virtually no one came to THEIR aid ...no helicopters, no FEMA, no Red Cross, no nothing for weeks and weeks. And yet the news media focused on NO rather than the "success" stories in the outlying areas of Louisiana, Miss., Alabama, and Florida. Well, sure! But the thing that keeps bothering me is ....Cotton, you and I and most people that I know would NOT have been in NO, or if we had, we'd have gotten out. Why did all those people wait and wait for help? Why didn't they do something for themselves? The people in the outlying areas DID, and they came through it without much else but the clothes on their backs, just like the NO people. See? Is it because big-city people can't do shit for themselves?? And, yeah, it's good to see you back. Let's hope things go better this time around, okay? Baron Max
Yeah, that's probably true. But, that's sensationalism for you. Whatever will draw the eyes to your newscast. However, I do think that FEMA, Red Cross, etc. were able to get to the non-flooded areas sooner than they got to the people at the dome and the convention center. Maybe some of them waited as long as the people in New Orleans, but again, I would have rather been them than the people in NO. Well, there could me many reasons. A lot of them probably thought it wouldn't be as bas as it turned out to be, and thought they would chance it. You remember a lot of the previous hurricanes this year that hit Florida weren't as bad as predicted. Maybe they were naturally expecting, once again, that the news would be "sensationalized." Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Cry wolf too often, and people will start to ignore you, as the saying goes. Maybe because such a large city like NO has a lot of poverty and many honestly had no way to get out. Maybe some thought they were being brave. A lot of people made a big mistake, as it turned out. But I think next time a big hurricane threatens, more people will take it seriously. Probably some of them, yes. Hey, it's a by-product of our times. A negative side of our modern, information-based society. I'm gonna try my hardest. If I start to get too abrasive again, please, let me know, and I'll take another sabbatical. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
