Like most news media, CNN devoted heavy amounts of coverage today to the potential and later the confirmed release of a new version of the iPhone. Being something of a Luddite and in any case insufficiently wealthy to purchase one of these sacred, life-affirming gadgets, this "news" is not relevant to me. But more to the point, it simply isn't relevant. The number of things wrong with this coverage go a long way toward explaining why the mainstream media, the alleged Hard News, is indistinguishable from Stuff magazine. You own an iPhone? You're interested in it? You like electronic gadgets? That's all great. It doesn't change the fact that this. is. not. news.
Information about the release of a new consumer product used to be called advertising; apparently the media now believe that if enough yuppies in their target demographic people own said product it becomes news. The media plead that their hands are tied. News about new cars, hot fashion accessories, and new beeping gadgets is What Viewers Want. And if children want to eat Pixy Stix and a jar of Smuckers for dinner, then by God, that's what their parents should give them.
We need a little paternalism from our media. We need them to take the attitude that, goddammit, you're going to sit down and watch this story about Afghanistan or read this lengthy piece about Congressional spending bills because it's important. Because you need to know in order for our society to function like a reasonable approximation of an informed democracy. Instead we are so conditioned to believe that what we want is what we must get, the real news is pared down gradually but continually and coverage of the iPhone fills the void – news which is indistinguishable from advertising in any significant way.
I try to impress upon my students that discussions of "bias" in the media are a red herring; our society is hypersensitive to the specter of political bias when the damage is being done by more subtle commercial bias. In short, CNN and FOX carry segments about the iPhone because they want people to tune in, not because they have an insidious agenda to eliminate hard news. Their fates are dictated by Nielsen ratings, subscription figures, and advertising rates. If running actual news brings in x viewers and crap about a phone brings in 10x, the decision is made for them.
So it's your fault. And the media's fault. It's everyone's fault. Decades of anti-intellectualism, atrophy of basic reading comprehension skills, and the decline of civic-mindedness have produced a citizenry that neither wants nor is capable of understanding a real and potentially complex news story. Indeed we feel it is right that the media respond to market incentives and give us what we want. We really want to know about SpacePhone and its new apps! How does it match up with the Palm and Blackberry competitors? Such stories have always been legitimate fodder for journalists but were understood as dessert items, just-for-fun pieces provided as a refreshment after the real news. Alas, we've done away with any pretense of eating a balanced meal and our media obligingly provide a buffet of candy.
Daniel says:
hmmm candy.
potcha says:
This is news, its not just advertising for the phone. If you had never noticed, when something sells very well, other people begin to lean that way. (touch screen, nintendo wii motion sensing, HDTV, etc. So when the leading product is releasing new things for their product, you should take notice, because it is a indicator of the way technology is swaying. Which IS important to some of us. This seems to be a simple case of narrow minded thinking. Not everyone cares only about the same things you deem important.
cschack says:
Potcha: But there's hardly a lack of sites like Gizmodo or engadget on which tech geeks like us can obsessively follow a live feed of Phil Schiller proudly announcing that the JesusPhone now can send MMS (which my SE 610 could do 6 years ago, btw) – I love this stuff myself and spend too much time on the aforementioned sites as is, but I still recognize it as "soft" news. Fostering an understanding of what's happening in the world and the economy at large (of which the iPhone is but a part) can only be beneficial; maybe if there was more hard news to sift through, people would have a better grasp of what terms like "socialism" and "fascism" actually mean.
Virginia S. Wood, Psy.D. says:
"…our society is hypersensitive to the specter of political bias when the damage is being done by more subtle commercial bias."
Amen. I personally am driven crazy by the network's "news" about its own upcoming shows, e.g., news "stories" that are just teasers for Nightline or whatever. NBC does this to advertise its own website. "You can learn more by visiting MSNBC" is a line I have heard one too many times following what could best be characterized as half of a news story.
Between that and the pornulated women journalists/readers, I have pretty much been convinced not to watch network news any more.
I'd rather read the paper. Unfortunately, papers seem to be going the way of the dodo.
Misterben says:
Yet another expression of how the American system of corporate management, and its particular brand of capitalism, undercuts the ability of the managed corporations to pursue their ostensible missions.
Under the American system, the first priority of a corporate board is to satisfy the whims of distant investors who care far more about a .0001% increase in return on their investment than they do about the actual quality of the work the corporation does. (A close second priority for the board is making sure they get theirs; everything else is a distant third.)
Under the old system of management, before the modern American system really came into its own, a corporation's managers were far more free to pursue goals in addition to profit: the quality of their product or service, for example. There was room for things like integrity.
Even the modern system wouldn't necessarily be so bad if corporate management remembered that it has responsibilities to society beyond increasing corporate profits by another minuscule degree. But America's corporate sector has forgotten the social contract, and its obligations therein.
Tim says:
$299? It's time you drop the career blogger bit and start working towards something with a better paygrade, say bus boy or fast food attendee. Then all your Apple dreams may come true.
dr fuzz says:
it's funny that a blogging ass clown would shit on a device that could be used to read this pile of shit. maybe that's irony. then again that's assuming people would come back to read this blog again.
Kevin D says:
Thank God for PBS/ Frontline the last bastion of decent news.
jon says:
dr fuzz,
That vitriol you throw? Right back atcha. There was no shitting on any device, just an acknowledgment that it shouldn't be heralded in with fanfares played by cherubs tossing confetti upon us from on high at a time when there is actual news to be reported. Learn some perspective and reading comprehension, you commenting assclown.
grendelkhan says:
No, no, it's news for nerds, stuff that matters.
But honestly, given that the news business has devolved into glorified stenography for government press releases, would you expect them to treat business press releases any differently?
Michael says:
I agree 100% – this isn't "news" about trends in new technology. It's product placement, pure and simple. And if you don't think the Marketing & PR teams at Apple didn't work overtime to get this "news" story picked up by major media outlets, then you have no friggin' clue how advertising works today.
A new iPhone is NOT news.
And is it me or are we getting more hateful comments these days?
Ed says:
Trackbacks from CNN.com always bring in a nice cross-section of dickheads.
John says:
@dr fuzz: Lulz, an iFail owner got butthurt that nobody else cares about his status symbol.
On topic: This is simply a symptom of the way the American system is set up. News corporations are exactly that — corporations. As much as people might like to fantasize that they exist to disseminate information to the people, that is false. They exist for the same reason a car dealership exists; to make money. The dealership is not selling cars because they believe it benefits mankind, or because they feel the people have a need to own a car. They do it because it makes money. It is the same way with the news.
FOX doesn't harp an ultra-right-wing message because they think the world really needs to know it (though they do think that, as an afterthought), they do it because they know there's a market out there that will watch it religiously, and bring in ad revenue.
When the distribution of information regarding important events is controlled by the drive to profit from it, rather than for its own sake as important information that everyone needs to know, the quality immediately goes to pot. When the people are informed of political happenings by companies that have a vested interest in presenting a certain view to please advertisers and maintain a certain target demographic, there will inherently be slanted presentations. That's what happens when money is the only driving factor in a society, it stops being about the support of the society.
There was a movie, I forget what it was and I'd have to search for it again. But it was a movie about a fairly poor family slowly tearing itself apart through stress and interpersonal problems. All of the abuse and broken relationships being displayed did not phaze the audience one single bit, when it was shown at a film festival. But one scene did cause people to actually get up and leave the theater — a scene where one of the characters started flushing money down the toilet.
When Money has been turned into a society's de-facto God, people stop caring about humans. All they care about are little slips of paper.
John says:
Ah, found it.
http://www.avclub.com/articles/not-again-24-great-films-too-painful-to-watch-twic,2048/
Number 4, "The Seventh Continent".
Emily says:
This reminds me of a dinner I prepared for myself a couple of weeks ago. I spent the day with my friend and her child. We bought produce and other perishables. After parting ways, I planned to make a lovely meal of red curry with tofu and veggies over jasmine rice. Instead, I opened a bottle of pinot grigio and ate a couple slices of multigrain bread. Because instant gratification won over sensible meal planning, I woke up feeling like ass the next day (I made the curry that night).
Do with that what you will.
jazzbumpa says:
Ed –
While I agree with your basic premise, I must again demur on your invitation to accept blame. This is not my fault. It is entropy in action. If you ever get the JesusPhone, perhaps you can take it up with Carnot and Gibbs.
And I really do believe that FOX takes their reichfluegel political message very, very seriously, indeed.
Mark says:
It's not like CNN and FoxNews were ever created to report the facts of current events in the first place. The days of television journalists who are actually interested in reporting the news are long over. Cable news channels were created for one reason only – to make the likes of Ted Turner and Rupert Murdoch that much richer. It's a business and it always has been. Don't watch it, turn it off, read the AP or Rueters if you want actual news. They are reprinted in all the major newspapers. At least there you can choose not to read the opinion columns.
Oh, and I left this comment via iPhone ;).
ladiesbane says:
Have we ever had a news agency that was not a commercial concern, here in the US? (I'm too tired to search intelligently and keep coming up with journals of philanthropy rather than non-profit presses.)
I've been told that grassroots blogging by responsible citizens will fill the meaningful news-void, but I suspect people only read commentary blogs that say things they already find agreeable. (Or which inflame their self-righteous disagreement to their ultimate enjoyment.)
Overlady says:
HA HA HA HA (wipes tear)
Forgive me: Dr Fizz(?) comment that Ed is a "blogging ass clown" is STILL making me laff! I think it is the way he separated "ass" and "clown" into two words… hilarious
You are SO RIGHT Ed! ABout the news. You have Overlady's impramitur of Correctness.
Samantha says:
This seems relevant to this post: http://www.recombinantrecords.net/docs/2009-05-Amusing-Ourselves-to-Death.html
Sincere Wilson says:
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2009/0609092prank1.html
So, the report on this that I saw said the caller could be guilty of a felony. Oh, and the people responsible for actually doing the stuff…they were embarassed. I am beyond stunned at how we as a culture have just tumbled off the cliff.
Dumbfu(k who destroys hotel and endangers guests under her responsibility: victim.
Prankster who takes morbidly moronic clerk for a ride: felon.