Thank You,
Mike

Stalin said this as well, something in the vein of, “The death of one man is a tragedy, the death of millions is a statistic.”

While that quite may be accurate, it doesn’t mean that we should accept the reality of it. Thousands of people suffer globally while our media offers nothing but apathy and indifference. How much televised media time have you seen given to “Octomom” in the last month, compared to the truce being developed between Pakistan and the Taliban?

“Myles, I’m curious. What’s your ethnic background?”

White. Would this argument not hold water if I had a different racial identity? I am unsure about why this is even relevant.

JBH,

“Not sure where you get the for-profit angle.”

The American news media is a for-profit run industry. They appeal to their audience with sensationalist stories to capture attention, in order to sell ad revenue.

Guess how much coverage “Octomom” has received on PBS!

“Most of the news journals that carried extensive coverage of Terri Schiavo, until the end anyway, were non-profits.”

What is the source for this? CNN, Fox News, MSNBC, and ABC News, all for-profit corporations (NewsCorp, Disney, Viacom, Microsoft), ran with this story extensively, and the hysteria involved in this case even evolved into political pandering. It didn’t become relevant until the news had beaten the same sensationalist drum they always do. Once it became a case that effected national legal precedent, it was covered by more wide-spread and reputable sources.

“But that can happen if they think consumers want it. We are all tied, in the newspaper world to what consumers want. It’s reality.”

That is why my intended audience for this appeal wasn’t to journalists, but instead, to society as a whole to pay attention to what types of media they digest every day.

You can’t blame for-profit media for reporting on profitable stories, it’s the nature of the beast. What people can do, however, is “vote” on what type of media is relevant with your pocketbook–that is, stop consuming so much sensationalist “junk news” and pay attention to the actual world. Americans didn’t inherit the stereotype of ignorance for no reason at all.

Finally, Maddie might have been a bad reference, but the McCann case in Europe was huge, and without explicitly saying so, it reflected not just the American populace’s obsession with sensationalized headlines. Laci Peterson might have been a better example selection.

Vicki DeArmey: “It’s like food. Some people live off junk food and others eat healthy . What we eat usually affects how we live and see the world around us.”

That is exactly the point I was trying to make. Thank you.

Your conclusions are baseless.

Not sure where you get the for-profit angle. Most of the news journals that carried extensive coverage of Terri Schiavo, until the end anyway, were non-profits. On Caylee, it was local news affiliates that carried her story in hopes of finding her. I agree with the writer above, it’s not that people didn’t care about toe other world news, it’s that the local angles were perhaps a face–a local face–that people could related to that compelled them to watch. In the case of Terri Schiavo there was an entire human rights issue, a question that is still being asked around the world, involved, the question of the value of life and who should/can end it. Even the Pope weighed in. I would say that for the millions who are consumers of the news, that made it newsworthy.

The Terri Schiavo case was a clear example of where if there was little coverage, as there had been throughout most of the case, journalists would have had to finally answer as to WHY they chose NOT to cover an issue that was so compelling that the courts, the President, the Congress, the Pope and hundreds and thousands if not millions of citizens were watching. This was not simply a grieving husband who wanted to end his ailing wife’s life, as some thought, but to many it was a much more complicated case of disabled patient’s rights, families rights when there is a disagreement over care, euthanasia and more. It was a case of who is lying and who is not–and when can the court decide if a person lives and dies and how prolonged that death can be (remember it took her 13 days to die from dehydration and starvation because there was essentially nothing wrong with her except that she was brain damaged).
So, I would say that even 4 years later, since the case is still being discussed in ethics classes, journalism classes, and in court cases and more, there is good reason to believe this was not sensationalized journalism.

Caylee’s case was sad and yes, I even tired of getting alerts when there seemed to be no more to say. But that doesn’t mean people weren’t keeping up with other news, it seems to indicated at least one or two reporters in Orlando were trying to win some sort of non-stop coverage award or something. But that can happen if they think consumers want it. We are all tied, in the newspaper world to what consumers want. It’s reality.