Several years ago a reporter showed up at a shooting just a few minutes before air, then did a live shot without knowing all the facts. The reporter played up a racial incident, which later turned out to be nothing more than a cop shooting back at a guy who was shooting at him.
And.... cue the riot.
Many reporters put their own assumptions ahead of the truth in their haste to be first, or just controversial. The results can be disastrous. When you jump to conclusions without doing the legwork, the story becomes an opinion.
Several years ago I met a producer of a major network show who had covered the Iran hostage crisis. I mentioned that every time we saw the Iranian people, they were shaking their fists in defiance.
"Do they do that all day?" I asked, tongue in cheek.
"Only when we point the camera at them," said the producer.
Hmmmm. Are people only "angry" when the little red light goes on?
Right now the anger in America appears to be at the level we saw in the 1960's. But unlike the 60's, we're seeing more opinion injected into coverage.
When we see a brick thrown through a Democrat's office window, the culprit has to be a Republican.
When we see a gunshot in the wall of a Republican's office, the culprit has to be a Democrat.
Case closed. Tell the police investigators to go home, since the media has already solved the crime.
Several factors are in play here. First, there are always whack jobs and disturbed people out there. What they do is not always political. What political party did Ted Bundy belong do? Was David Berkowitz (Son of Sam) a Democrat or Republican? If these guys were committing crimes today, media people would be looking for political undertones. Surely, anger at the government triggered their killing sprees.
Second, getting fifteen minutes of fame has never been more alluring. Look no further than the White House party crashers. People love being on television. Next time you're covering a crowd that might turn angry, note how they act when you're just walking around and how they change when you shoulder the camera. The general public has learned that playing to the camera can land you on the evening news.
But the bottom line is that too many media people are jumping to too many conclusions. When you have no proof, no facts, no witnesses, and nothing on tape, you're basically broadcasting a story that is pure opinion.
And that just makes people even more angry.
1 comment:
that's why i HATE covering protests. folks are usually standing around bs-ing when we show up in an unmarked car, but pull the camera out, and they start chanting, shaking their fists, and marching in circles. when we load out, they leave.
we started showing up right before the protest was scheduled to end. if they're still there, we shoot 'em. if not, it was just a show for the cameras, and we didn't miss anything.
Post a Comment