"Not long ago I was debating someone on television. I thought the discussion was going well until the commercial break when a producer said into my earpiece, “Be angrier.”
“Why should I be angrier?” I asked him, irritated that he hadn’t appreciated the thoughtfulness of debate.
“That’s how we get channel surfers to stop and watch the program,” the producer explained. “Eyeballs are attracted to anger.”"
Like I say, the media is attracted to easy. Much easier to sell anger than thoughtfulness. And the American people deserve a lot of the blame. For all their talk about wanting a better political dialogue, they make this shit profitable, both politically and financially.
3 comments:
Streak, I am not sure the issue is "the media is attracted to easy." I think it is more that channels and the media need to sell ads to be a productive business. Now, there is an issue there - the shift toward corporations owning multiple news outlets, profits being the bottom line, not necessarily reporting, etc. However, the producer's job, after all, is to get "channel surfers to stop and watch the program." Thereby, the channel could charge more for ads during its telecast. In a way, this speaks to your Glen Beck posting below. Opinion shows, like Beck, O'Reilly and Olberman, are popular for Fox and MSNBC is probably because debate and opinions draw more viewers than facts.
I was listening to a guy on ESPN radio and he talked about why he talks about Brett Favre all the time. A) Brett Favre gets ratings. B) Most people who listen to his radio show only listen for about twenty minutes. Therefore, to inform and bring in listeners to his show (and have ESPN radio and WWLS sell ads during those four hours), he finds different angles from which to discuss the Brett Favre story.
Certainly, "anger," debate, and Brett Favre (to bring in a sports reference) are the easy stories. But they have the ability to reach the widest number of viewers and potential consumers.
-- WIV
I tend to blame about 95+% of this on the population at large. It seems silly to be angry at the people selling us stuff since they are so carefully molding what they sell based on what people want to buy. It's much like everyone complaining about our elected officials ..... the one's we continue to elect.
It's part of the reason I drink.
Streak, When listening to some of the sports coverage of the Tiger Woods fiasco this morning, one of the radio guys on ESPN gave this line - which I think adds nicely to this discussion. I paraphrase, but "Here at ESPN, we don't do important. We do popular."
Again, I think our discussion might be one of semantics that anything else - is there a difference between "easy" and "popular"? I have enjoyed thinking about this though - thanks for posting the link above.
--WIV
Post a Comment