Wednesday, May 9, 2012

Surely, Their 15 Minutes Are Up

I always liked Andy Worhol’s idea that everyone wanted and eventually got their 15 minutes of fame.  One of the current news shows now has a segment called “Your 15 Minutes Are Up.” I think that this good idea should be applied more broadly.  The media should stop quoting certain people who have long since been irrelevant.  Here are some suggestions:

In the field loosely called “entertainment” we have already seen some famous quotables disappear from the public eye and ear.  Remember Paris?  Remember Nicole?  Remember Brittany?  No?  See how it works?  So how about no more stories about Lindsay, Charlie, Ted, the Donald,  Jessica, Kim or Khloe? Aren’t their 15 minutes way more than up? Who are they and what do their lives have anything to do with us?  Why should we care what they were or weren’t wearing?  Why need we know what they did wrong lately?  Why are they getting paid for being celebrities? Last year while 13 million Americans were unemployed, Kim made more than $10 million.  For What?  For whom?  Let us live without major news stories about these celebrities in name only. If we want to hear about them, we can tune in to our favorite celebrity gossip show, but let’s keep them off the Nightly News, please. They are narcissists and coverage only encourages them.

But what about politics?  We have forgotten Spiro, most former House speakers, many former mayors, almost every unsuccessful candidate for Vice President and even some villains from the previous administration like Rummy, Wolfowitz, Perl, Gonzales and Ashcroft.  Can we start forgetting to mention people like Karl Rove, Dick Cheney, Sarah P., Michele B., Newt, Herman, Glenn, Sean, Rush, Rick P., Rick S. and most of the Fox News cluster of political hacks?  Must we continue to hear hatred and disinformation from a group that claims to represent a part of our country that should not be encouraged? Do we think that they will someday say or do something that seems honest or intelligent?  Really? Let’s try to name one thing that any of them ever said that reflected intellect, education, wisdom, insight, decency, kindness, goodness or compassion.  Give up? Let’s try to remember why these political prostitutes ever got our attention. Can we? So let’s not quote them anymore.  Their views will always be welcome on their party’s official propaganda network of fixed news.  Let that be the quarantine of their hypocritical negativity.

They too are narcissists and coverage only encourages them.

What would our daily news be without stories and opinions involving the above mentioned who are well past their 15 minute time limit?  The news could be about important issues of the day.  The news could avoid hyperbole and easy fixes by not interviewing the brave souls who survive some of the natural disasters that are occurring almost weekly now. “It was a miracle that even though we lost everything, no one was killed and that’s all that matters.”  We know and appreciate your faith and courage, but we have heard it a million times. We can live without reporting on tragedies night after night until we no longer care.  We could live without interviews of people on the street to get their views.  We don’t care.

So what could the mainstream news be like?  It could be like the PBS Newshour which briefly covers the day’s events but then focuses on three or four stories to get an in-depth analysis of each issue and its context. There should be a minimum of speculation which almost always turns out to be completely wrong - more about the speculator than the speculation.  Many reporters are timid and they propose timid concerns rather than facts and figures.

We could be given more facts and figures rather than a lot of adjectives and adverbs.  If we hear a report about a labor dispute, give us the numbers.  How much do they make now and how much do they want?  If we are talking about unemployment tell us who the unemployed are: what is the percentage of the 12.5 million by age group, educational status and type of work.  That way we can start focusing on the solution instead of thinking it is happening everywhere, to everyone.

When inviting experts to represent each side of an issue, let it be respected experts with no political axe to grind.  It makes no sense to ask lobbyists or politicians who have a clear bias to tell us the way it is when we know that these people have lost their integrity years ago.  Do we believe Paul Ryan, John Boehner, Eric Cantor or Mitch McConnell?  Really? Do we respect Paul’s grasp of macroeconomics or John’s emotional facial expressions and his imitation of penguins walking or Eric’s denial that he was adopted or Mitch’s impression of Huckleberry Hound or of Tommy the Turtle that he offers up daily to distract us from his real intent?  Clearly the Speaker should never play poker because he has no poker face - it reacts badly every time he lies and the cameras seem to always catch it because of its frequency. And must we be subjected to John McCain insisting that we go to war - with everyone: Libya, Egypt, Syria, Iran, Russia and soon maybe North Korea, China and all of Africa? When grapes turn sour and bitter must we be expected to swallow them? When will their 15 minutes be up?

When interviewing political figures, reporters can start not only quoting their sometimes absurd comments or answers, but also challenging them.  When the Republicans in the House were trying to blackmail the President into concessions in exchange for raising the debt ceiling, their leaders said that it was a balanced approach and was needed to force cuts in our bloated budget.  They said that we have kicked the growing deficit down the road too long.  The press should have asked if they remembered that at the end of the Clinton administration in early 2001, we were running surpluses and planned to eliminate the accumulated deficit by 2003.  They could have asked him if he remembered what happened to derail that prospect and drive us into $15 trillion in debt.  They could have asked him how it was balanced when the debt had to be raised as it had eight times under the previous administration as it had been without debate dozens of times in the recent past.

When the very unsuccessful candidate for President in 2008 said that we could not deport people here illegally because they were G-d’s children, why didn’t every reporter, or at least one, ask him that with that logic aren’t all creatures G-d’s children and if so how can we go to war with them or put them in prison when they commit crimes?  When this same candidate accused Barack Obama of wanting to use taxes to redistribute wealth, why didn’t the media point out that that was the very function of government and always has been.  When the press is given a photo of a crime victim to show on T.V. and realize that instead of being of a 17 year old football player who is over six feet tall, it is of a small 12 year old, they could demand a more up-to-date picture.

This November, we will be given an opportunity to tell many members of Congress that their 15 minutes are up.  My hope is that the majority of freshmen members of the House are encouraged to rush back to their lives of obscurity and let us hear from intelligent, responsible representatives whose integrity is still intact.   But an informed electorate is dependent upon accurate information.  The mainstream media could take it upon themselves to change their ways and begin focusing on serious reporting.  If a candidate being interviewed is saying something that doesn’t make sense, the reporter must pursue it.  “What does that mean?” or “Could you be more specific?” or “Can you give me an example?” or “Do you want to listen to the tape yourself to hear what you said ten minutes ago?” or even “Are you kidding?” or finally, “Are you crazy or something?”

I could say so much more about this, but I’m afraid that my 15 minutes are now up.

No comments:

Post a Comment