Paxety Pages

A Periodical - Internet Edition

 

Home
Daily News and Commentary
Mahone Speaks
Lehamic's World
Cuba Libre
Bluenotes and Three Heads
Feature Articles
Tales and Humor
Our Animal Companions
Music
9/11 Memorial
Guest Appearances

Site Meter

Why Won't The Old Media Correctly Report The Number Of Resolutions?
Saturday, March 01, 2003   By: Juan Paxety

Lack of education and laziness figure prominently.

[Image]Why would the traditional news media insist on referring to the next UN Security Council resolution on Iraq as a "second resolution?" As I pointed out earlier, there have been at least 18 previous resolutions. It's easy to assume there is some liberal agenda/corporate interest being advanced. I spent about 15 years working in various local TV newsrooms, network O&O newsrooms, and for a couple of newspapers, and, based on my experience, I think other things are at work.

First, I'm not impressed with the education received by most broadcast journalism majors. Many of the degree programs include no math, and I worked with several producers (the people who actually write the newscasts) who admitted they never had a history or geography course in high school or college. All too many news people lack the foundation for understanding that there is a historical perspective to news stories.

Second, most of the folks working in newsrooms today were in school, not newsrooms, during the Gulf War. They lack sufficient history of personal experience. For most, it is the second resolution that they've had to deal with. It's even self-perpetuating in some minds - the producers believe the audience thinks it's the second resolution, so they argue they should write second resolution.

Third, many TV people (news, sales, operations, and management) believe the audience is stupid, uneducated and unable to understand. They believe references to the many past resolutions would confuse the audience. (I noticed while listening to the Sean Hannity radio show that he makes reference to "the 18th resolution." The reference doesn't seem to confuse his audience.)

Fourth, I've heard some people argue that not all of the Iraq resolutions have to do with inspections. That may be a valid argument, but 12 of the resolutions do deal with inspections. Still not a second resolution.

Fifth is the pack journalism phenomena. If you watch a big story develop, the initial stores from different sources are usually different. Soon, however, everyone begins to report on the same thing and use the same phrases. It's because news people listen to one another and want to be an accepted part of the group - a normal human trend. It also means reporters/writers/producers don't have to think.

And sixth, and I think most important, is sheer laziness. Writing news, especially for TV, is hard. Unlike book or newspaper readers, a TV viewer can't go back and re-hear something that's been said. TV must be written for the ear, and the sound must go with the pictures. That kind of writing requires work. Good writing also requires the writer to search several sources (including his or her own memory) while writing. All too often now, writers simply cut and paste stories from AP wire copy. If one is writing a story on the UN debating a resolution, it's far easier to write "second resolution" than to research how many there actually have been.

What would I do? I'd have someone do a simple story listing the resolutions, then I'd refer to 19th resolution - or even "another resolution." That's probably easiest.

  



(c)1968- today j.e. simmons or michael warren