Of course what one often forgets in these programs is that ultimately what you are watching is entertainment, the most hysterical, shock jock you can get- it’s almost in passing that current affairs are even mentioned. Of course it’s almost too comical to think one has to rely on a comedian to get one’s dose of real time news.
Then there’s the internet, and even there the country’s desire for rhetoric and gossip goes unabated. Go on Gawker, it’s sister site Jezebel or any other entertainment site- Perez Hilton, Guest of a Guest, TMZ and all you’re bound to get is an unabated wish list of which of your favorite celebrities (because it’s all assumed now that metaphorically one is either a (faux) celebrity or in love with one), what fabulous party you are suppose to attend and why Gina the grizzly hipster is back in Williamsburg- an admittedly brilliant but nonsensical parody by Gawker. An attempt to even dissect or examine the assumptions at hand is bound to cause most publishers a mind block(fuck?), but then again why bother when micro waving last night’s left overs of Dr Ruth’s Chillie tostadas is an easier and more palpable affair.
But then again the media almost has no choice. With the world hyper linked to each other and the whole world linked to Google the idea that Google now equals truth (that is if it’s on Google then it happened somewhere) publishers are forced to pay dizzy attention to the fresh crop of catch friendly google word of the day. Which is another way of saying that if a publisher is to stay relevant and economically viable (yes just because they give you news and gossip- let’s always remember ultimately they are in the business of making profit,not necessarily conscientious provocative news…) they too are forced to punch in the key words that are making the rounds that day.
In essence media companies have become well attuned social aggregators trying to capture the most web clicks – because ultimately this is how a media concern is rewarded via it’s advertisers. Which is a sad way of me telling you that you will forever be inundated with stories about Lindsay Lohan’s existence (although if one looks closely – her life is a parallel of the dysfucntional times we live in now…), Carrie Bradshaw’s after party and the new ‘slut’ that Tiger Woods is now banging who in 6 months time is going to coincidentallybecome a new TV reality host.
Which of course brings one to the obvious question- why are these words the catch phrases in the first place? Instead of erosion of wages, health benefits, illegal wars fought in South America (things that believe it or not matter more to the ordinary person than Carrie Bradshaw’s new squeeze) or the name of the guy doing his best to make sure minimum wages stay at a paltry $5.15 or there about. Part of the answer lies in the fact that most media is concentrated (thanks to lobbying and the lack of back bone of congress to say no to dominant media companies looking to buy out whole markets) in few hands, that most media now is morphed into entertainment complexes, where the same entity that now makes movies, bombs, chemicals, lends money are in the end somehow and often owned by the same singular entity (think GE) which precludes too severe commentary or thought and the fact that most public thought or cultural landscape is positioned as such as to assume that what happens from points A- D is the whole world when in fact any seasoned traveler or enlightened individual will tell you that the whole world is actually A- Z, but then again why bother with E- Z if Rupert Murdoch‘s NY Post or Nick Denton‘s Gawker can’t be bothered with it?
