You’re not watching real news; you’re watching a scripted show

By David McElroy · September 28, 2011

Most people with at least half a brain realize that “reality TV” is anything but reality. It’s scripted and edited to create the drama and tension producers want — to attract and entertain viewers. But how many people understand the same is true of news?

Newsweek’s Howard Kurtz has a great article this week about how Fox News boss Roger Ailes is making changes at his news channel to tweak its positioning. Although the moves are interesting all by themselves, I was struck by some of the details that emerge in Kurtz’ reporting, because it’s very obvious that the purpose of the producers is to create drama, not to enlighten people.

Because Fox let Kurtz have behind-the-scenes access to meetings between producers preparing for last week’s Fox GOP presidential debate, it’s clear that the network doesn’t mind you knowing this. The unreality of news has become so accepted that it doesn’t cross anybody’s mind to be ashamed of manipulating what should be serious discussion into being a televised melodrama about personalities instead. They might as well be plotting to create chaos between cast members of “Big Brother.” Kurtz reports:

Hours before last week’s presidential debate in Orlando, Ailes’s anchors sat in a cavernous back room, hunched over laptops, and plotted how to trap the candidates. Chris Wallace said he would aim squarely at Rick Perry’s weakness: “How do you feel about being criticized by some of your rivals as being too soft on illegal immigration? Then I go to Rick Santorum: is Perry too soft?”

“That’s going to get some fireworks going,” said managing editor Bill Sammon, grinning.

When showtime arrived, producer Marty Ryan choreographed the action from a crowded trailer outside the convention hall: he called for a two-shot when Wallace invited Mitt Romney to criticize Perry’s immigration stance, so the audience could watch both men’s agitated expressions. But Ryan barked, “Let’s just be on Perry,” as the Texas governor demanded to know whether Santorum had ever been to the Mexican border, capturing the moment. Afterward, Ailes phoned a top lieutenant: “Tell the team we’ve been kicking ass in these debates.”

This isn’t news. This is scripted manipulation of reality to create drama — to create a show to get you to tune it. It leaves you entertained. Maybe angry. Maybe amused. All the networks ultimately care about is that it keeps you watching. It also keeps you terribly ignorant and paying attention to all the wrong things.

I’ve explained before why I don’t watch television and recommend that others don’t, either. This goes to the heart of that issue, but it’s not just the surface-level things that are obvious. It’s the fact that it changes your way of thinking. As you watch the televised shows — and mistake them for serious substance — you think less and less about ideas and more and more about personalities and the hot-button issues that you’re fed. Before you know it, your thinking is so confused that you’re nothing but a mindless consumer of a passive product.

It’s no accident that the guy running Fox News isn’t a journalist. He’s a long-time political consultant. Ailes is someone I have a lot of professional respect for, even though I frequently disagree with him. He’s smart and he understands how to communicate themes. The problem is that he worked for years on communicating simple themes to voters in a dumbed down way — which I’ve done plenty of, too — but how he’s taking the same dumbed-down approach to getting viewers to watch. It’s a great business strategy. It’s great for manipulating people. It’s just a very dangerous way to handle public discourse.

(Just to be clear, this criticism isn’t directed just as Fox. It’s true of all the TV news. Fox is more successful right now simply because Ailes and Co. understand the game very well. The others are doing similar things, just not as effectively. The problem isn’t the people or the approach. The problem is the inherent limitations of the medium itself, which I discussed in my previous article about television.)

If you want to understand the world, turn your television off. I won’t complain if you watch some sports or if you use your television to watch movies on. But don’t get hooked into being a viewer of TV’s regular programming. And whatever you do, please stay away from “TV news,” which is the biggest oxymoron around. You’re being manipulated in order to get you to watch a show. It’s not going to help you think.

Of course, if you’d rather just live a passive consumer existence — and you don’t care that you’re not going to be prepared for the changes coming in our society — go right ahead consuming the garbage being pumped through your TV set by all the channels. Just don’t complain that nobody warned you.

The “reality” you seen on the news isn’t reality. It’s manipulated content to get you to watch. If you’re spending time with that content, it’s ruining your ability to think — and you don’t even realize it.

Share on Social Networks

We are ruled by the dumbest and most incompetent people among us — and we have a system which allows stupid and irresponsible people to force the costs of their idiocy onto smarter and wiser people. Can we get away with that? Yes, for quite some time. But we eventually reach a point at which the dumbest of the dumb — who are habitual liars and mentally ill fools — lead us to the disasters and destruction that some of us have seen coming for years. We are approaching that point. And yet most of the idiots around us still wave their rhetorical banners of support for the evil people who are leading us to ruin — and all of them point their fingers at someone else, never noticing that their own enthusiastic support of evil is to blame. When things finally fall apart, blame yourself for your blindness to the evil, not whoever happens to be in power when it happens.

I’ve been making some changes to the site lately and there are more changes coming in the days ahead, so don’t be surprised if you some small differences. This is not a wholesale redesign, but rather the addition of some features. Since they’re smarter than I am, I’ve put Oliver and Alex in charge of the technical work, which you can see in this action photo from the control room of our media complex. I recently added a series of landing pages for readers who randomly discover the site from an Internet search. I’ve also changed the YouTube link at the top of the page to go to the new YouTube channel for video essays that reflect things I’ve already published here. (Here’s a little bit about both of the YouTube channels I’m working on.) In addition, I’m trying to move away from using Instagram, so I’m experimenting with photo plug-ins that will eventually allow me to host the pictures — cats, dogs, sunsets, whatever — that I often take. So don’t be surprised to see more changes. Thanks for your patience. Let’s hope Alex and Oliver know what they’re doing.

I have no use for the theocratic and repressive government of Iran. The people who run the country are cruel at best and evil at worst. The Iranian people deserve freedom. But I have no personal quarrel with anybody in Iran. While I’m not thrilled about a future Iranian government having nuclear weapons, I’m just as concerned about nukes in the hands of politicians in Israel, Pakistan, India, China and Russia. I’m not even thrilled with the U.S., Britain and France having them, either, because I don’t trust any politicians to be responsible with such terrible weapons. All I can say with certainty is that American taxpayers have no business attacking Iran, especially since we’re being forced to pay for this attack in order to benefit the politicians of Israel — and nobody else. If Middle Eastern countries want to fight among themselves, that’s none of my business. It’s not the business of the U.S. government, either. I have no quarrel with anybody in Iran — and having the government which claims to represent me launch an unprovoked attack against a sovereign country will only make all Americans less safe in the near future. This attack is poorly conceived and morally unjustified. Remember that when the Iranians launch attacks that we will then condemn as “terrorism.” What the U.S. is doing right now looks like terrorism to me. And let’s not forget that the attack is the latest in a long line of unconstitutional wars by various U.S. presidents — who have no legal power to declare war on their own, according to the U.S. Constitution.

A child having a tantrum understands only one thing: Did I get my way or not? He doesn’t understand the issues involved. He doesn’t understand the reasons that went into a decision. He doesn’t understand any of the things that mature and reasonable adults have to understand in order to live healthy lives. By his reaction to the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling to strike down his disastrous tariff scheme, Donald Trump shows himself to be — once more — a screaming child having a tantrum. Outside the world of mob bosses who expect to get their way every time, normal adults don’t act this way, but Trump isn’t normal. He’s an angry and vengeful man who has narcissistic personality disorder. And we are in danger as a result. Trump doesn’t understand the legal issues involved in this ruling. He doesn’t understand economics. He doesn’t understand rule of law. He doesn’t understand that he can ever be wrong. All he understands is that he didn’t get his way. And he is now a narcissistic and raging little boy who also happens to hold life-and-death power over most humans on this planet. He’s dangerous — and the system which gives him that power is even more dangerous.

Is it an attempt to blur the gender line between men and women? Or is it some weird tribute to the traditional Scottish kilt? It’s hard to say, but fashion designers keep pushing for men to wear skirts in the last few years. Both men and women in modern fashion seem oddly androgynous, as though it would be offensive for a man to look manly or for a woman to look feminine. A CNN article about the latest fashions from Paris caught my attention Monday and left me wondering about the ugly clothes the designers are hawking. If a man wants to wear a skirt — or a kilt — that’s OK with me, but I’ll stick with a traditional dark suit with a white shirt and tie. (Well, when I’m not wearing t-shirts and sweats, of course.) I always wonder who actually buys the outlandish garb from fashion designers anyway. I would be humiliated to be seen in any of this stuff, but I obviously have no sense of high fashion.

Related Posts