Mine accident miscommunication sturm und drang

[hgc]

I think the media's obsession with the miscommunication about survivors, and the few hours it took to sort it out, is absurd. I can understand the victims' families being upset, but why does the news media insist on trumpeting hurt feelings as the big story here, to the detriment of reporting about … say … why this tragedy happened? Just another sad reminder about how emotions are bigger news than facts.

[Ed]

Ratings.

[zenith-nadir]

It is the way for the media to obscure that it was they who fumbled the ball big time on this one. I happened to stop on CNN this morrning and was appauled at their "who us?" attitude.

[hgc]

It is the way for the media to obscure that it was they who fumbled the ball big time on this one. I happened to stop on CNN this morrning and was appauled at their "who us?" attitude.To be honest, I'm not so concerned about the media reporting at the time that this was the information being told to the families. I don't consider that a big media mishap. It's the obsession with the aftermath that bothers me. It's totally overwhelming the story of the actual accident.

[zenith-nadir]

I don't consider that a big media mishap.The media reported something as fact without verifying it to be true. That is a huge problem.

It's the obsession with the aftermath that bothers me.Me too. It's like picking at the bones of dead people - and as Ed said - simply for ratings.

[Ed]

At least it made Greta and Geraldo's day.

Vampires. They are the "journalistic" version of John Edwards and his ilk.

[zenith-nadir]

Vampires. They are the "journalistic" version of John Edwards and his ilk.I agree. If you flip through the American channels this morning all the talking heads are asking the same questions..... "So how did you feel when you found out they were dead instead of alive" and "who do you blame for this".

[hgc]

I agree. If you flip through the American channels this morning all the talking heads are asking the same questions..... "So how did you feel when you found out they were dead instead of alive" and "who do you blame for this".You would think that thinking they're alive and then finding out they're dead is worse than them dying in the first place.

[Ed]

A couple of years ago I had lunch with a bud who was a very senior guy over at NBC. This was during the wall to wall coverage of the JFK Jr. pussywipped plane crash.

I asked him "what is up with this crap?"

His answer was to the effect "look, if we stop and they find his body people will stay where they heard the news and we will loose ratings".

The point is that the media does not care
1)whether a story is news worthy
2)whether a story moves the collective social peanut ahead
3)whether a story is true

What they care about is whether a story has "legs", that is whether it can be milked, at an acceptable cost, for ratings.

When I worked in an Agency I was on a task force that attempted to define the charageristics of a "Big Campaign". Things like "Wings of Man" or the Marlbouro Man. The point was that once the thing is established, the cost of ongoing production is bupkus. The "Big" refers to profitability.

In news we have the growth of the same thing... when you manufacture a story (and they certainly can .. I will relate the conversations I had with a sports producer sometime) and have the sunk cost of setting up in, say, Aruba or VA or wherever, every day that you can generate ratings you cover that sunk cost and produce profits. It is in their (the networks) financial interest on a pure p/l basis to milk these stories for all they are worth.

In the present case they created a story on top of a story. I am not spinning a CT but I am sure that there are no tears being shed.