Back in the day when newspapers ruled, whenever there was a major breaking story someone would cry: "Stop the presses, breakup the front page." I can only wonder if the death of a singer would have caused such a commotion back then?
Today, newspapers are dying and television news from the network to the local station are struggling. Why?
Take a moment to think about the so-called "wall to wall" coverage of the death of Michael Jackson, apparently from natural causes-- still to be determined as of this writing. Again I ask why?
The decision makers, i.e. news directors will claim this is what their viewing audience wants. I believe the truth is elsewhere.
First, the heard mentality. Reporters have always competed with each other, trying to beat each other to advance a story. Nothing new here. What is tragic is the definition of news today and how it is reported.
Second, concerns about what the other stations are doing. Are they live? Do they have a chopper overhead? How many reporters on on the story? True enough when covering something like a wild fire that is consuming neighborhoods, but the death of a singer. Or last years ridiculous coverage of another singer's mental breakdown?
There can be no argument that Edward R. Murrow is the dean of broadcast journalism-- more godlike really. And it is Murrow in his own words who warned us in a speech to the Radio Television News Directors Association 50 years ago that what is happening will happen.
Murrow said, ". . . And if there are any historians about fifty or hundred years from now, and there should be preserved the kinescopes (film machines) for one week of all three networks, they will there find recorded in black and white, or color, evidence of decadence, escapism and insulation from the realities of the world in which we live." I have included a link to Murrow's speech below.
The very definition of decadence is the coverage of Michael Jackson's natural death not just because he was a popular singer-- but also suspected in child molestation's-- never convicted though. The breathless reporting on mainstream newscasts stories that Britney Spears didn't wear panties could only be described as decadent!
Sadly, Murrow's prediction came true in spades-- note that he gave this speech fifty years ago.
Murrow's point was not only to warn, but to push for responsible news reporting; investigative pieces on subjects that while a large audience isn't guaranteed, those who do watch will be better informed or perhaps better warned. So instead of using their considerable resources from the networks including cable news to local stations to gather and present the serious news that truly affects our lives, broadcasters chose instead to go all out so they could out do the competition on the natural death of a singer.