It seems I am not alone...
Jul. 2nd, 2009 08:50 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
Last Friday, the morning after Michael Jackson died, I happened to be in the kitchen pouring myself a cup of coffee when I overheard Matt Lauer segue into a segment featuring the godfather to Jackson's children, who apparently had something newsworthy to say. After having observed the widespread pre-emption of quite a bit of programming the night before to cover Jackson's death, I perceived Lauer's report as a signal that, barring some kind of surprising or scandalous revelation, the subject of Michael Jackson's death had been pretty much exhausted over the airwaves.
My bad.
This morning, very nearly a week after Jackson's death, I was again in the kitchen, again pouring coffee, and there was good old Matt Lauer, giving viewers a tour of the house at Neverland Ranch.
Somewhere in the past couple of days, I heard a snippet, to the effect that a Pew Research Center poll found that 64 percent of people surveyed thought coverage of Jackson's death was excessive. I was not surprised at the result of the survey.
What did surprise me today was hearing about how MSNBC's Nancy Snyderman took the opportunity to dig into the poll to focus on the racial aspects of the results. Presumably, it was really important to come up with a reason why 70% of whites felt coverage was excessive, as opposed to just 38% of African-Americans who felt that way.
Ye gods.
Personally, I think the major networks are milking the Jackson tragedy for all that it's worth, and I would imagine it's worth a lot, because if all that coverage didn't bring in the big bucks, then they'd be doing something else. Personally, I prefer to exercise my natural right to largely ignore the boob tube, which probably makes me a misanthrope of some kind.
Anyway, as far as the networks are concerned, who wants to listen to all that boring stuff about Congress voting on bills that nobody has read (Waxman-Markey), Potemkin-style "town hall" meetings (via Chip Reid and Helen Thomas, of all people), or unemployment hitting a 26-year high?
Cheers...
My bad.
This morning, very nearly a week after Jackson's death, I was again in the kitchen, again pouring coffee, and there was good old Matt Lauer, giving viewers a tour of the house at Neverland Ranch.
Somewhere in the past couple of days, I heard a snippet, to the effect that a Pew Research Center poll found that 64 percent of people surveyed thought coverage of Jackson's death was excessive. I was not surprised at the result of the survey.
What did surprise me today was hearing about how MSNBC's Nancy Snyderman took the opportunity to dig into the poll to focus on the racial aspects of the results. Presumably, it was really important to come up with a reason why 70% of whites felt coverage was excessive, as opposed to just 38% of African-Americans who felt that way.
Ye gods.
Personally, I think the major networks are milking the Jackson tragedy for all that it's worth, and I would imagine it's worth a lot, because if all that coverage didn't bring in the big bucks, then they'd be doing something else. Personally, I prefer to exercise my natural right to largely ignore the boob tube, which probably makes me a misanthrope of some kind.
Anyway, as far as the networks are concerned, who wants to listen to all that boring stuff about Congress voting on bills that nobody has read (Waxman-Markey), Potemkin-style "town hall" meetings (via Chip Reid and Helen Thomas, of all people), or unemployment hitting a 26-year high?
Cheers...
no subject
Date: 2009-07-03 02:55 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-07-03 02:55 pm (UTC)For example, it occurs to me that Snyderman's analysis offers an excellent opportunity to do a little algebraic problem-solving, to wit:
But that's just me.
Cheers...
no subject
Date: 2009-07-03 05:54 pm (UTC)I was a fan of MJ in middle school and the band played several of his songs. But not so much after I grew up.