Took a little time today to go back in time a little bit and read this story on what became known as the Covington Catholic incident. Although it didn't take place there, but in DC. For those paying attention―and I can't really say I did at the time―it was an early warning that the news media was not only falling short, but doing something very different from what its job should be.
Some aspects of the case are very much of its time and of ours 3-4 years later. Particularly the way both protesters and the internet decided that a bunch of white teenagers from a Catholic school were the villains of the story even if they were mostly just trying to stay out of the way.
But there's a more long term pathology at work here as well. Now that cell phones are pretty much universally equipped with video cameras, anyone can take a video of anything at any time. And so a lot of people take advantage of this. But the broad tacit assumption is that video you take will show everyone that your subjective view is objectively right. It can't really do that, but once you try there are other people who will go along. Either to be polite or because their prejudices are similar to yours.
2 comments:
I thought I remembered the episode quite well but it turns out I hadn't really paid as much attention to the events of that afternoon as I'd imagined. What I knew was the kid was exonerated of the charge he'd been deliberately harassing a native American drummer (who turned out not to be a Vietnam veteran, or a beloved shaman for that matter). That pretty much was the extent of my knowledge.
The Atlantic article was a decent overview of the incident as it had happened and it's true Nicholas Sandmann was excoriated by the press and 'interested individuals' who like jumping into any spotlight that may be shining. It wasn't long before other videos began to appear and the occurrences of that afternoon became more clear. Sandmann, likely with help from his family and a volunteer attorney or two, sued the Washington Post, NBC and CNN for $millions - all of those were settled out of court. Interestingly, the libel lawsuits against ABC, CBS, Gannett, the New York Times, and Rolling Stone were dismissed by a federal judge just this past summer. We can't blame the guy for trying for the big money.
It appears to me that although there've been ordinary people making videos for years it wasn't until the advent of smartphones that everybody got to be a video journalist. If somebody falls down there's a better chance someone will be filming than going to help the person up. In the past an event like the March For Life might have been covered by the media or maybe not. Now that video journalism has levelled the playing field and there are popular venues for sharing them (youtube, facebook, tiktok, twitter etc.) the mainstream media has been struggling to keep up and not doing too well according to the stats. They weren't ready for the onslaught and neither were most people - but it's a fact now and only time will tell how we'll deal with this new reality.
It's the kind of story that it's tempting to tune out because of the obvious hype. But it turns out that this isn't just a case of everyone in the media running after a flashy but insubstantial story. There were some real and damaging distortions being made. Otherwise there wouldn't have been much grounds for a lawsuit afterwards.
These media outlets chose to play fast and loose with the truth. They should have been more responsible, especially given the fact that the person they were most intensely vilifying was a minor. Actually the whole crew there were minors. And of course the story they were reporting was substantially wrong. Does that mean they should have to pay out? And if so, how much? I can't claim to have the answers to those questions. I am relieved that at the very least they got embarrassed in public a little. Even if some people will choose to ignore the result.
As far as the person falling down thing goes, yeah. It's easier to stay in passive filming mode, it seems. Of course there is the other side of it. Our largest news & information providers have proven themselves incompetent and/or untrustworthy on many occasions. Street-level reporting is necessary, and right now it's mostly coming from the hoi polloi. Between the high and the low we certainly are getting a lot of quantity now. Of course quality hasn't grown at the same rate.
Post a Comment