Monday - September 13, 2004

Category Image So-called "Journalists," Cults of Personality and Changing the World


Long ago, when radio and newspapers were still dominant, newspapers put much stock in their reputation for accuracy. Well, that's the myth anyway. Along came the now-deified Edward Murrow, by all accounts a good man, but whose name was used to create a myth of an ethos of "journalism" as though it were a profession that required some sort of ethic and training.

Schools began offering "journalism" degrees, which were eagerly sought by the less intelligent and by the hopelessly misguided who wanted to change the world. There's nothing wrong with being less intelligent, nor is there anything wrong with wanting to change the world. But the thing is that most people won't change the world. It's a big world and it has a lot of inertia, and it frankly won't change based on the romantic visions of the feel-good "journalists" who think the pen is mightier than the sword.

So what happens when a lot of less intelligent, feel-gooders who want to change the world get older and find it harder and harder to think of ways to change the world? Good question.

But first, one more facet of "journalism" must be looked at. As news coverage's reach from the print media waned in impact and television came to dominate, it was natural that two factors influence the news: Advertising got more expensive by far, creating undue influence on the content of the news, and ratings to get those advertising dollars became much more critical. Getting ratings had much more to do with the face and the voice on the screen and less and less to do with the content and reliability of the news.

Thus grew the cult of personality in the field of "journalism." Personalities that aren't very intelligent. Personalities that think that their job is to change the world.

So, let's pretend that you're a not very intelligent guy, say you have a Texas twang that you can exaggerate for that homey effect, and you find as you near the time of retirement and enfeeblement of age that your dream of changing the world isn't coming true.

Well, this is natural, because only a very few people will change the world, either by luck or by brilliance or by extraordinary personality. But you're not very bright and you think just because you have a homey Texas twang and you've managed to hoodwink a network into making you their lead anchor that you should be able to change the world. What do you do?

Well, most people of principle, character and adult maturity would conclude that fate just hasn't made your world changing possible, at least not yet, and continue with your campaign as best you can.

The problem is that some people with homey Texas twangs seem to believe that they should take matters into their own hands to change the world in any way possible.

Thus, the people at CBS seem to be prone to forge documents to throw an upcoming election.

It's not their fault (I'm trying to use the language of the less intelligent world-changer-wannabes), it's the fault of the system. It's the fault of a television broadcast system controlled by the government through the FCC to discourage competition. It's the fault of a cult of personality that magnified the self-perceived power of less intelligent men.

It's not their fault. It's just that they're bad people and they can't help it.

Go Back to the Start, Do Not Collect $200   Send me your two cents
|