Journalism

Criticizing TV News: A Reality Check

123RF

Last Updated on August 26, 2020

Over at TVSquad, a site I particularly enjoy, writer Anna Johns takes a swipe at the media over its coverage of that 101-year-old mugging victim whose assault was recorded by a security camera outside her New York City home:

I can’t decide who is more sick in the head: the producers who keep playing the video or the mugger.

She questions why the assault itself is “national news,” blows off the argument that there are legitimate feature stories about elderly abuse because of the story, and concludes that the reason the story received so much airplay from coast to coast is because there was that surveillance video.

This is hardly the discovery of the age.

Television, after all, is a visual medium. It’s radio that’s supposed to be the “theater of the mind” where storytelling is suppose to inspire one to come up with their own mental pictures of what is being reported. If producers have a way to work in some compelling video, the kind that will make viewers actually stop multi-tasking long enough to actually stop and pay attention for a minute, then they’re going to grab for that video.

On a radio newscast, a soundbite recorded on tape is always going to be of more appeal than a news reader just reciting what someone else had to say.

I do agree, you might be surprised to know, that the story has gotten more play than it should have, especially on the national cable channels, which have a lot more time to fill in their schedules. I believe I read this morning that legislation is being proposed to stiffen penalties against those who abuse the elderly. If that’s true, the legislation may well have been inspired by outraged viewers who picked up their phones or sent emails to their local lawmakers. Television has that positive effect sometimes, not that a critic would ever notice.

I do agree, you might also be surprised to know, that this mentality of putting a video-rich story ahead of a video-poor story isn’t always the best thing for television news. But we’re also dealing with people’s attention spans getting shorter because of the dreaded remote control.

My biggest problem with her little “TV is the bottom of the barrel” and “television news is pure crap because it doesn’t report real news” rant is this: she’s writing on a site dedicated to entertainment news.

Let’s put this in perspective. If I do a quick search at TVSquad for “Breaking News,” I’ll find many interesting posts. There’s the criticism of MSNBC for labeling “Tomkat’s” wedding as “breaking news.” (I’d agree with that.) There’s the criticism of news channel’s constant use of terms like “breaking news” and “developing stories” that mean little because they’re so overused. (I’d agree with that, too.)

But then there are some posts of “important” entertainment stories — I’ll give you a moment to process that… — that have “breaking news” in their titles:

Paula Abdul reports assault: BREAKING NEWS

ABC’s Elizabeth Vargas pregnant – BREAKING NEWS

Michael Richards on Letterman tonight – BREAKING NEWS

Starr Jones off The View: BREAKING NEWS

BREAKING NEWS: Conan’s baby!

I hope that it’s unnecessary for me to ask whether anyone thinks that in the grand scheme of things, with all of the real problems in the world, any of these are really deserving of a label like “Breaking News.” But I’ll ask, anyway: were any of these developments earth-shattering? Did you have to leave work early, or go without dinner, or lose sleep because of any one of those news items?

And yet here they are, all of them called, unnecessarily, “Breaking News.”

How obsessed are we as a society with “non-news?” Well, you could always look at the Nielsen ratings. The most recent week’s top ten tells quite a story of their own:

1. American Idol – Weds (FOX)
2. American Idol – Tues (FOX)
3. American Idol – Thurs (FOX)
4. House (FOX)
5. Are You Smarter Than A Fifth Grader? (FOX)
6. Deal Or No Deal (NBC)
7. Without A Trace (CBS)
8. CSI (CBS)
9. Cold Case (CBS)
10. Heroes (NBC)
11. Two and a Half Men (CBS)
12. CSI: Miami (CBS)
13. Extreme Makeover (ABC)
14. Survivor (CBS)
15. Criminal Minds (CBS)
16. 24 (FOX)
17. Deal Or No Deal (NBC)
18. Rules of Engagement (CBS)
19. Lost (ABC)
20. NCIS (CBS)

Entertaining shows? Well, some of them are. But real news? Hmm…what’s wrong with this picture? Even the venerable 60 Minutes, which still does some hard news and relevant stories, isn’t on the list. Is there any wonder why news producers might try to lure viewers to their shows with stories that might be less than the traditional Huntley-Brinkley-style news? I’m not trying to make excuses or say that they’re right for doing so. But at the same time, their job depends on bringing viewers to their shows, so it’s hard to blame them for doing what the ratings tell them is what their viewers want to see.

I am happy to report that not everyone at TVSquad is always as quick to go after the “easy target.” Writer Jay Black posted some of the things I’ve said before here at Patrick’s Place in a piece called, “TV 101: Why you’re not allowed to complain about what’s on TV.” Some of the comments are less than kind, but that’s to be expected: when there’s the chance to point fingers at the television, some people can’t line up fast enough. When those fingers get pointed back…well, hell! That’s just no fun at all.

Even if most of his finger pointing is right on target and well-deserved!

the authorPatrick
Patrick is a Christian with more than 30 years experience in professional writing, producing and marketing. His professional background also includes social media, reporting for broadcast television and the web, directing, videography and photography. He enjoys getting to know people over coffee and spending time with his dog.

3 Comments

  • Oh geez, I saw yesterday “Breaking News: Anna Nicole Autopsy Results Released Monday”. What? Did I miss it? And why on Friday is it breaking news? Oh wait, you mean you are just alerting me that on Monday you are going to have something to tell me? Ugh. I agree with you Patrick. De 😉

  • If you work for any major media news outlet than your primary job is to confuse and scare the American people.

    Come on, Dave.

    Do me a favor and visit project censored and go through the list of stories that your news outlets didn’t have time for and maybe you’ll get an idea of what you really do for a living.

    I’ll be happy to visit the site. But I can assure you: I know exactly what I do for a living. I’m sure you don’t need some website to tell you what you do for a living.

  • Patrick,

    I think you have a hard time evaluating what the news does without making it personal. You’re involved with it and you’re a good guy. I’m sure most the people you work with a great people. Unfortunately, as Marx pointed out, you are what you do.

    If you work for any major media news outlet than your primary job is to confuse and scare the American people. The same news media that “doesn’t have the time” to cover the growing impeachment movement has all the time in the world to cover the Anna Nicole Smith nonsense.

    Do me a favor and visit project censored and go through the list of stories that your news outlets didn’t have time for and maybe you’ll get an idea of what you really do for a living.

    FYI, the airwaves belong to the American people. We should be using a valuable resource like that to inform and educate our fellow citizens.

    peace,

    dave

Comments are closed.