|
MINING
THE RATINGS
By Matt Taibbi
 Our
national media
has many favorites among the various types of news stories:
plane crashes, celebrity divorces, sex scandals involving
masturbating congressmen. But if you had to pinpoint the one
type of news story that is guaranteed in every case to make
every news director in the country pitch an instant, wind-catching
tent, you wouldn't have to look far. The mother of all news
aphrodisiacs is unquestionably this: innocent human beings
trapped in an enclosed place in desperate circumstances, their
lives hanging in the balance.
There
are a few caveats to this rule. The would-be victims have
to remain alive long enough for satellite trucks to reach
the site. Actually, they don't have to be wholly alive, per
se; it's enough if they're not yet confirmed dead and still
possibly alive. The essential factors are really the ability
to plausibly stretch out the drama, a colorful location in
front of which live stand-ups can be done, and a complex means
of attempted rescue, necessitating
the use of extensive graphs and diagrams and the input
of a parade of scientific/technical experts. An additional
bonus comes when the story occurs in an unusual climate, allowing
reporters to wear (pick one) a) a state-of-the-art Gore-tex
coat with numerous straps and pockets b) a turban c) a wetsuit
or d) a vest and crampons.
 Last
week's story of the trapped Pennsylvania miners was a classic
of the people-trapped-with-time-running-out genre. If the
little girl trapped in the well was the first top-40 hit,
and the Kursk Russian submarine disaster was the breakthrough
triple-platinum album, the Pennsylvania miners were the latest
solid gold single announcing the full maturation of a distinguished
career. The TV ratings reflected the public's final acceptance
of the genre. According to the Associated Press, the ratings
for both CNN and the Fox news channel were roughly six times
greater than usual between 11 p.m. last Saturday and 3 a.m.
Sunday, when the miners were being rescued.
CNN
reported 2.3 million viewers during that time period, as compared
to their average viewership for that slot of 319,000. At Fox,
the numbers were 2.1 million against 306,000. Both networks
ran live coverage of the rescue effort throughout most of
the weekend. On the print side, the two major wire services,
AP and Reuters, each filed over 100 stories apiece between
Friday and Sunday, at times filing updates as often as every
few minutes.
Asking
why the media goes so bonkers over these stories is like asking
why a dog licks its balls. The reason in both cases is: because
it can. A life-or-death drama induced by accident is about
the only kind of story that our media can cover these days
without holding anything back at all; it's the only thing
that tests the design parameters of our media machine. Virtually
any other kind of news story, even ones that involve other
types of life-or-death dramas, require the American press
to undertake at least some conscious deceptions and omissions.
Take
9/11, for instance. This was also a disaster story that involved
a rescue effort, but it was also sharply politicized. Though
the administration blamed Osama bin Laden for the attacks
within hours, none of the major media outlets felt comfortable
asking how the blame could be laid so fast, or describing
in detail what the reasons for the attack might have been.
Even Dan Rather admitted: "There are some things about this
story that we just can't cover."
Same
thing with Waco, and the Oklahoma City bombing. Both stories
were natural suspense dramas whose scope as news stories were
narrowed because of their politicized nature. In both cases
an exhaustive treatment of the story would have resulted either
in depressing excersises in national self-examination that
would have reduced the stories' entertainment value, or in
too close a look at various dangerous and taboo themes (i.e.
public disaffection with the government) that the news media
stays away from as a matter of rule.
But
accidents and natural disasters are ideologically neutral
and therefore can be covered exhaustively. And they can be
covered not only as breaking news stories, but as features,
human interest "readers", and as subjects for that full gamut
of mawkish, sentimental, and hero-worshipping commentary pieces
that pass for analysis on our opinion pages. That's the irony
of the whole thing; that the full attention of the analytical
press corps is only focused completely when the subject is
something that everyone, right from the start, is in obvious
and complete agreement about.
That
said, the orgy of saccharine self-congratulation in newspapers
around the country in the wake of the miner rescue was startling
even by the standards of the genre. Major news daily after
major news daily served up the satisfying patriotic conclusion
to the story in the primitive form of a TV sitcom's 23rd minute:
"You know, Billy, I learned something today..." Here are some
of the highlights:
- St.
Petersburg (Fla.) Times: "Miners Taught Us What's Important."
(Jul. 30) Defying the idea that America in the age of corporate
scandal is an immoral place, the heroic miners proved to
us that faith, courage, community, and the wise stewardship
of leaders like Pennsylvania governor Mark Schweiker is
the true face of our country. Concludes with a first-class
Tony Robbins-ism: the miner story allows us to "focus on
what is truly important," i.e. not all that other bad news.
- Seattle
Post-Intelligencer: "We Cheer Together When Nine Miners
Saved." (Jul. 30) Again, defying the expectation that we
might boo the news, we Americans cheered at the rescue of
the Pennsylvania miners, who proved to us the worth of those
particularly American qualities: "Skill, strong spirits,
and faith." Includes an homage to those other heroes of
Pennsylvania's Somerset country, the passengers of United
flight 93, who overpowered terrorist hijackers on 9/11.
- Christian
Science Monitor: "Setting Miners Free." This one touched
on all the necessities: a recollection of 9/11("Like the
heroism seen on 9/11..."), a tribute to the wise leadership
of Governor Schweiker (here paid the ultimate compliment
when he is called a "Giuliani-like presence"), a reminder
of the power of "immeasuable prayer", and a cheery corporate
plug ("They shared Lifesavers..."). God, heroism, leadership,
and candy: the ultimate feel-good American story.
 The
news features weren't much different from the editorials.
Every conceivable angle from which to address the "love/faith/heroism"
angle was covered. There was
the feel-good story about the miners' hometown of Somerset
("Pa. Town Wakes Up to Wealth of Heroes From Miners' Rescue,"
AP, Jul. 28), the feel-good story about the miners' families
("Families Rejoice At Miners' Survival," AP, Jul. 28), even
the feel-good story of an emotionally drained President of
the United States ("Bush 'Thrilled' That Miners are Safe,"
Jul. 28, Reuters).
A
quick side note: none of the many stories about Bush's elated
reaction to the miner rescue noted that the United Mine Workers
of America vigorously opposed Bush in the 2000 election, among
other things because he favored a repeal of ergonomic safety
standards in workplaces.
Probably
my favorite feature headline was this one: "Pa. Residents
Hope Coal Miners Safe," from Reuters, Jul. 27. When I read
that one, I thought: "Residents Hope Miners Safe... as opposed
to what?" What are the alternatives to such a headline? "Residents
Hope Miners Experiencing At Least Mild Discomfort?" How about
"Residents Hope Miners Remember to Floss?"
It
sounds like a bitchy criticism, but after a long enough exposure
to this hysterical treatment of the obvious, one can get pretty
frustrated.
Almost
none of this would be objectionable at all, were it not for
one thing: NO ONE IN THE MEDIA GIVES A SHIT ABOUT MINERS.
When was the last time you saw a miner who wasn't trapped
alive underground in the news? In the week-long period during
which this Pennsylvania story was news, there were no fewer
than three major fatal mine accidents around the world: one
in Ukraine that killed 19, one in China that killed 8, and
a third in Zimbabwe that killed 15.
None
of these stories registered more than a three-inch brief in
most major dailies, and not only because the victims weren't
American. The main reason they were ignored is because the
victims didn't stay alive long enough for the networks to
get a live shot in. After all, the Kursk sailors were Russian,
and they made the news because they had the good sense to
flail around for a while underwater before they croaked.
Miners
die all the time. They work in horrible conditions all the
time. They get screwed by their employers all the time. In
May of this year, mine workers finally got a break when the
federal government indicted a single coal mining company called
KenAmerican Resources, Inc., on charges of falsifying safety
records and manipulating equipment used to monitor coal dust
records. It's a widespread practice in the coal mining industry:
rather than shell out the extra money to make sure miners
aren't working in conditions that will leave them dead from
black lung disease by the age of 35, companies rig their monitoring
equipment to make it appear that the mines are safe. The Louisville
Courier-Journal ran a lengthy series on the issue about four
years ago, but that's been about the only hint of that story
in the national media since then.
That
kind of thing isn't newsworthy because people who die over
a period of years, as opposed to days, are not news. If you
want to get on TV in this country, die within the space of
one news cycle, die by accident, and die draped in an American
flag, with your grieving nuclear family and your local pastor
at your side. Otherwise, find a dime and call someone who
cares.
|
