I think the problem people are having with the media coverage of Anna Nicole's death is not that it's being covered in the first place, but how grossly disproportionate the coverage is compared to other news stories involving celebrities and/or tragedy.
Dozens of celebrities with far greater worth to our culture have passed on during this decade and not a single one received even a 1/10th the media attention that Anna Nicole did in her passing. Furthermore, Anna Nicole has now received more media coverage than Hurricane Katrina did and, I'm sorry, but that's a huge wake up call that we're living in an unhealthy society.
I disagree that she's gotten more coverage than Katrina. I saw a lot of programs during the week of her death, but now the updates seem to be the antics of the judge or her mother's little cry-fests, but my experience has been that we've moved on from the initial shock and full-time media coverage.
What I was saying is that it isn't just a death. It isn't just a tragic death or semi-tragic death or who cares death. There is a huge legal battle going on. There's a judge who is auditioning to get his own television show and making a courtroom circus. This is more than just sitting on the couch for an entire 36 hour period on July 16, 1999 watching television helicopters scan the ocean where JRK, Jr.'s plane had gone down. Like it or not, there are legal developments and drug developments to report on, and we've been following tawdry legal battles ever since the advcent of A Current Affair and the heyday of the OJ trial.
The day she died CNN went for the longest period without a commercial break since 9/11, specifically 90 minutes. I think Katrina was on for about 50-60 minutes when it first hit. So yes, she has received more media coverage than any event during this decade next to 9/11 and including Katrina
( ... )
The problem with the OJ trial is that it is used quite a bit as the advent of modern day sensationalist news hitting the main stream media - who were normally sticking to the traditional "top 3" definitions of "what is news
( ... )
Very interesting and valid points. Did you study Communications in college? Because I did and you sound like someone who has received a higher education in that area.
Anyway, you're right, there is significant overlap between the OJ trial and the aftermath of Anna Nicole's death. I think I follow your Mac analogy; is it kind of like apples and pears? I.e. two items that are ultimately separate but that have a number of notable similar characteristics?
Getting back to my stance, I guess what I'm saying is that the fact that their is such a large audience in America for sensational media is at the core of what I find disturbing. So, yes, in the eyes of many people this *is* news (b/c arguably it emotionally satisfies primal and/or voyeuristic urges), however, in the grand scheme of what is truly important and effects our society and culture, it *isn't* news.
I did, in fact get a BA in public communications [PR] which made me take many many journalism classes. [Walk the talk stuff for press releases.] But I ended up back in college for Graphic Design and now I make things look pretty...so that's the story on that
( ... )
LOL, I almost added "...maybe in public relations?" to my question.
Okay, I gotcha on the grapple analogy. (I've never heard of those, btw. Though I haven't been in a produce section in ages so we probably have them and I'm just clueless.)
"I agree - the skewing of news towards sensationalism makes me want to ralph. It's sick - it makes American's look even more like self absorbed idiots than we actually are. It's insulting."This is precisely what I was getting at
( ... )
So the question becomes "Why is the media following Anna Nicole's family around?" And the answer is "Because she was Anna Nicole."And honestly this goes to the heart of why it's a sad story all together. Lagiz keeps saying she wants her to have a peaceful & honorable post-death story. And yet that was soooooo not the Anna she played on TV. So why are they following it around? You're right, because it's Anna - and if you think about it that's how she made herself famous when she was alive [by being ridiculous, bigger than life, and a bit of fake-Hollywood] - why should we be surprised, shock or annoyed with it post-death? [Unless we were already surprised, shocked and annoyed while she was alive. Which is me
( ... )
Nope, I didn't say I wanted a peaceful and honorable death story. I was semi-responding to helpimarock's original post about how he wanted a normal death observation. I know why people are following her family around, and it isn't because this is JFK's family and we need a reaction, it is because they've all been in court and releasing statements for the last few months since Daniel died. This is a legal story, and whether we like it or not, the public (me included) has been following the family fights over paternity and family rights.
My sadness is that Anna's death is as big a trainwreck as her life, but that's not the media's fault in any way. It's her mom's fault and the fault of the assholes she hung out with.
Noooooo, I'm not in PR. In fact, PR people usually drive me up the wall. They were not well-liked by the greater Communications department (the largest dept. at Miami U. at the time and hence one of the most competitive) b/c they knew nothing about the medium they were supposedly studying. PR students were exempt from so many studies and, as a result, were clueless in a production studio and were near oblivious to media history and law & regulation. Though there were some cool students. For example, we had a PR student in the position of promotions director at the radio station while I was on the board who was easy to get along with, a major asset to the station and really made a difference.
Anyway, the main reason I held back with the "maybe PR?" comment was b/c I thought to myself "nah, she actually really knows what's she talking about." :)
I can totally see how PR kids would've driven you nuts while at school. Most of them stunk where I went and seemed to be only studying PR becuase they already tried at something else, failed, and were looking for an "easy" degree. But there were some good ones, indeed.
Thanks for the compliment in your last para - BTW :]
Dozens of celebrities with far greater worth to our culture have passed on during this decade and not a single one received even a 1/10th the media attention that Anna Nicole did in her passing. Furthermore, Anna Nicole has now received more media coverage than Hurricane Katrina did and, I'm sorry, but that's a huge wake up call that we're living in an unhealthy society.
Reply
What I was saying is that it isn't just a death. It isn't just a tragic death or semi-tragic death or who cares death. There is a huge legal battle going on. There's a judge who is auditioning to get his own television show and making a courtroom circus. This is more than just sitting on the couch for an entire 36 hour period on July 16, 1999 watching television helicopters scan the ocean where JRK, Jr.'s plane had gone down. Like it or not, there are legal developments and drug developments to report on, and we've been following tawdry legal battles ever since the advcent of A Current Affair and the heyday of the OJ trial.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Traditional news reasons to:
Immediacy
Proximity
Consequence
and the other 4 to:
Prominence
Oddity
Conflict
Suspense
Emotions
Dunno how I listed them wrong. Sorry!
Reply
Reply
Anyway, you're right, there is significant overlap between the OJ trial and the aftermath of Anna Nicole's death. I think I follow your Mac analogy; is it kind of like apples and pears? I.e. two items that are ultimately separate but that have a number of notable similar characteristics?
Getting back to my stance, I guess what I'm saying is that the fact that their is such a large audience in America for sensational media is at the core of what I find disturbing. So, yes, in the eyes of many people this *is* news (b/c arguably it emotionally satisfies primal and/or voyeuristic urges), however, in the grand scheme of what is truly important and effects our society and culture, it *isn't* news.
Reply
Reply
Okay, I gotcha on the grapple analogy. (I've never heard of those, btw. Though I haven't been in a produce section in ages so we probably have them and I'm just clueless.)
"I agree - the skewing of news towards sensationalism makes me want to ralph. It's sick - it makes American's look even more like self absorbed idiots than we actually are. It's insulting."This is precisely what I was getting at ( ... )
Reply
Reply
My sadness is that Anna's death is as big a trainwreck as her life, but that's not the media's fault in any way. It's her mom's fault and the fault of the assholes she hung out with.
Reply
Anyway, the main reason I held back with the "maybe PR?" comment was b/c I thought to myself "nah, she actually really knows what's she talking about." :)
Reply
Thanks for the compliment in your last para - BTW :]
Reply
http://www.grapplefruits.com/
Reply
...WEGMAN'S??
Reply
Leave a comment