I suppose one of the advantages with not having a television (that would be me) is that I don't see how bad things are in the world. Or at least how bad they appear to be. The audio news (also known as a radio) or the cyber news (also known as Internet) is bad enough – especially if you can follow events without having to view them.
So, as I hear about the economic meltdown in Greece, the ethnic cleansing in Nigeria, the religious barbarianism in Iraq, the natural disasters in the southern States, Chile, China, and Haiti, as well as the social chaos in Thailand, I get very, very alarmed. I get alarmed because I am not certain that there is the usual spin-doctoring by the world media, as well as I think things may be as bad or worse elsewhere, but there aren't enough reporters and cameramen to go around.
To be sure, it wouldn't be news if it wasn't ugly. Death, blood, gore, and tragedy are the order of the day, and there is something strangely intriguing about the grisly drama of life that gets played out before our eyes in our living room each night.
We are curious creatures – and that would be a play on words: Curious, in the sense of strange, and curious, in the sense of inquisitive. You and I know a lot of people who fall into the former category, but this column is about those of us in the latter category.
For example, the person who slows down to gawk at a traffic accident is quite likely the same who will stop on the highway to observe a bear sow and her cubs. The same person who stands in front of someone's house as it burns to the ground is quite likely the same person who will park along the side of the road to watch some special airplane fly over.
Never before in the ages of news reporting have we been so aware of what's happening right across the world. News or otherwise, we are as informed as any generation, whether it is the mind-numbing reality shows, the sordid talk shows, or the variety of special interest features. You want to hunt a fugitive, re-model your house, or peer into the lives of the rich and famous (and bored) middle-age women of America, it's all there for your viewing.
At the end of the day, though, I am not clear whether we are better off than our parents (and grand-parents) relative to having instant access to world misery. Some could argue that the quick response to Haiti's grief, for example, was due in part to the media exposure. Possibly, but who knows for sure. I would suggest in this case that the news stories should be on-going, that the continuing grief in that country remains a newsworthy item. That's where I personally see its value.
If we are so consumed with using the media for our information and enlightenment, and not mere gratification, we should think in terms of exposing moral corruption, sexual exploitation, and deadly tribalism – starting right here in Canada. I believe that we really need to know what's going on in the world, then react positively to it by something about it.
Anything less is mere voyeurism. It makes us a nation of bystanders, when we should be participants (that is, getting involved to help).
I love watching the news as much as anyone, though I rarely have the opportunity to. When I am finished, however, I often feel helpless about other people's situations, or I feel depressed about what a crummy world we live in. The solution is not turning the news off or not having a television. The solution is having a pro-active newscasts that somehow allow viewers to get actively involved with plausible solutions.
That would indeed be newsworthy.
No comments:
Post a Comment