Okay, okay, I’m sure with this verdict we’ll get more of the critics who say the media is devoting too much time covering the case of a world-famous pop megastar accused of molesting a little boy …
We should be paying more attention to highbrow, serious subjects like the filibuster fight, the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention & Consumer Protection Act of 2005, and the ongoing genocide in Darfur.
But you know what? In my paper today, we have 20 pages of coverage devoted to sports. (Fourteen pages of news stories, five pages of agate with statistics and scores, and our back cover).
I’m told that well-known NYC broadsheet even had an entire section devoted to sports. And they plan on repeating that tomorrow!
Why don’t people who criticize the media for covering frivolous subjects blast us for paying attention to sports? I mean: why is Michael Jackson’s guilt or innocence less significant than how the Yankees did last night? Why are the NBA finals more important than what happened to Natalee Holloway in Aruba?
Ultimately, there’s a reason why the mass media pays attention to these types of stories: the news business is, well, a business. Call it delivering what our customers want. Y’know, C-A-P-I-T-A-L-I-S-M, a concept some of our “conservative” critics seem only faintly acquainted. If the American people cared less about Michael Jackson and more about Medicaid reform, trust me, we would be happy to change our priorities.
Leave a Reply