To recap (in case you missed it):
Last week, Barack Obama formally announced his bid for the 2008 United States presidency. Yesterday, military officials released the first evidence that Iran is supplying Iraqi Shiite extremists with weapons. But all that aside, more importantly-- Anna Nicole Smith is dead.
The ex-Playboy-bunny-turned-controversial-socialite was found unconscious at her hotel room in Florida last Thursday, Feb. 8, and pronounced dead shortly after. Even though she contributed next to nothing to our society, she managed to monopolize every news outlet in the country for a solid three days.
How could producers decide that the death of one 39-year-old tabloid queen should take precedence over car bombs in Iraq or genocide in Darfur? According to thinkprogress.com, on Thursday, NBC’s Nightly News gave Iraq only 13 seconds of airtime, while devoting three minutes and 13 seconds to Smith’s death. CNN referred to Smith 522 percent more than Iraq , while MSNBC devoted 708 percent more time to the deceased blonde than to the war. And now, after the first wave of the Smith sensation has dissipated, she has resurfaced as the top story because nobody knows who the father of her daughter is.
The media’s fascination with this woman is ridiculous. Although the sagas of Smith’s multiple lovers might be golden-wrapped candy to tabloids and entertainment stations, it shouldn’t be the breaking story for 72 hours on CNN.
Not only is it boggling that so much time has been devoted to every aspect of this troubled woman’s life, it’s also damaging to the American public. The more often a story appears on the news, the more importance the average person would believe it to have. So, in Anna’s case, she’s right up there with the assassination of Kennedy.
It’s no secret that our culture is obsessed with celebrity. “TV Guide” is a better selling magazine than “National Geographic,” and 490,000 tune into MSNBC during primetime hours versus the 33 million who chose to watch American Idol, according to Nielsen ratings.
It is vital that broadcasters do not provide the public with inconsequential fluff. News relevance should be defined as what matters to the public— decisions and actions that effect humanity as a whole. We rely on news stations such as CNN to determine the relevancy of a story and promote the awareness of it, and unfortunately they (and their competitors) are falling short of their responsibilities. On Monday, 67 people died in Baghdad after four bombs exploded in a busy market. No doubt it will make headlines for an hour. Doubtful it will make it past two.
However, like everything else, news broadcasters are also businesses. They need to make a profit to keep their heads above water, and to do so they need viewers.
And viewers want to know who the daddy is.
This is a dangerous cycle. Because the news is bombarding us with Anna Nicole coverage, the audience perceives it as crucial knowledge. The more we stay tuned in to the soap opera, the more broadcasters want to give us sugary journalism.
Endings are always sad and Smith’s death is no exception. It’s a tragic event that warrants coverage, but a well-written obituary in USA Today would have sufficed.
She might have been a real blonde. But she’s not real news.
