When discussing the influence of the various media organizations on the typical American adolescent, and indeed the general population, it is difficult to know quite where to begin. Does one start with the evolution of the 24/7/365 news media that is now available to the majority of the American population? Or, perhaps, one could start with the pandering talking heads of what we, as citizens of a democracy, deem appropriate or informational. I choose to begin with disgust.
Tragedies befall people the world over, every day, in countless situations. But, we in America choose to limit our knowledge of “tragedy” to the biggest, bloodiest and most shocking events. The age-old adage “if it bleeds, it leads” has gone far enough. We have, as a society, finally fallen into the mindless, spineless pit of ignorance in the face of horror.
When I first heard about the tragedy-a word that, these days, seems to be used quite often in the media, often without proper justification-that occurred at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, I was sitting at my computer perusing e-mails and being blithely unaware of the events taking place in the world. I checked a national news Web site, and was shocked to see the headlines and stories detailing the unfolding horrific events in Virginia. Then, I turned my television, flipping to the first 24-hour news station I could find. Having already suffered the telling drop in my stomach as I watched and read the television, I felt a familiar feeling begin to bubble up within myself-disgust.
I was disgusted by the media’s portrayal of the victim’s friends. I was disgusted by the coverage of students who had no excuse for being on television at the time. The students interviewed should have been at home, or with one another, or with their families-the last place any student should be after a tragedy takes place at his school is standing in front of a television camera, detailing events that will not truly begin to be comprehended until many months have passed. I was disgusted with the media “correspondents” telling their viewers how the event was so terrible, and so very sad.
There is not a single sane person in this country, who would honestly say that the event was not sad or terrible-so why is it that, in this country, citizens are obsessed with having someone else, usually the perfectly manicured TV personality, tell them how and what to feel? One doesn’t need a person they’ve never met, and never will-a person to whom they have no personal or emotional connection-to tell them how very sad an event is, or how they believe a tragedy to be “beyond words.” If something were indeed beyond words, there would be no need for talking.
As a society, it is not our goal to comfort victims and to make them feel better about what has befallen them. Such comfort is empty to those who are capable of thinking about their troubles. No, our society is much more selfish than to give emotional connections
out for nothing in return-carry on capitalists, carry on! Our goal as a society has become to make ourselves feel guilty for not being victims in a tragedy. The tone of the media personalities often takes on a note of a patronizing adult disciplining a child. We are told that something very bad has happened, and we are told exactly how we are supposed to feel.
The greatest guilt of people today is that they convince themselves that this is, in fact, what they believe. Mindless acceptance of what one tells people does not make that one person right. If we are guilty for not feeling genuinely sorry or, barring that, for not being able to express our emotions, it is because, regardless of how many times that photos of the dead are splashed across a screen, we are lacking some essential human connection that can
not be remedied with simply showing smiling pictures of the now departed. Human connections are evaporating faster than the glaciers are melting and we, as sensational-seeking Americans, are fueling the fires of our own emotional destruction.
The tears we cry in horror and disgust and sadness toward tragedy fall to our cheeks like the wasted raindrops in a barren desert. We participate in the physical acts of sadness and empathy, but in fact we can not bring ourselves to be truly bothered with emotional involvement. Perhaps this is the purpose of the media bombarding us with coverage of horrible events: by numbing us to the most horrible events that take place, we are emotionally distanced from reality. And when the talking heads of the news services show physical displays of emotion, one can’t help but feel that it is nothing, if not forced. Acts of altruism by members of the liberal media are never what they appear to be on the surface, but are rather spectacular-one might even say sensational-performances by gifted actors.
The media would like to paint the picture of the human being as anything but selfish, which is completely the opposite of the truth. The truth is that humans are selfish: We are selfish in that we compete to survive, we compete to be better, to help ourselves, to make sure that we are taken care of first. The truth is that there is nothing wrong with this selfishness. Above all things, humans are selfish with their emotions, and why shouldn’t this be the case? Anyone who has ever been emotionally hurt will vouch that keeping up emotional walls is an effective way to stave off more pain. The media do not understand this concept, and wish to tell us what emotions should be felt, and when. News is only news to a person if that person can somehow ask, “How does this affect me?”
When the media realize that bleeding does imply leading, perhaps I’ll begin paying more attention to the “news” that they perpetrate. The sensationalization of news around the world is quickly becoming an epidemic that can only be exterminated by the vigilant and constant editorial review by the viewers. Demand the news, demand the facts, rip away the false realities of emotion fed to us as news and demand to be allowed to make your own emotional conclusions without the interference of the liberal-biased media. Maybe then, with an end to the quasi-emotional, sensationalized and over-expounded “news,” this country-after suffering so many tragedies and hardships-can begin to heal itself.
Andrew C. Emmerich is a senior studying English and secondary education in the College of Public Service.
