Journalists and tragedy...

[Deleted]

Is it me or does it seems the journalist on TV just seem to live for chaos/tragedy.

It feels like some of them cannot even be bothered to show some empathy or pretend to be saddened by the situation.

Is that a case of have seen it all so you become insensitive to it? Or is it my career depends on how much air time I get, the more the better so let's celebrate every tragedy?

I am mostly talking about those folks on TV news. How the hell do you go from announcing someone death or something as tragic and be smiling about whatever stupid news that resemble good news within seconds.

[Deleted]

They are called professionals.

ETA: I remember thinking once that I could never be a journalist in an area of famine, for example, because I would want to help. But as one journalist pointed out, getting the story out many help thousands vs a few folks you could help yourself.

[NomoreDramaQ1015]

What are they supposed to do?  Break down and sob uncontrollably at their desks while on the air for however long?

They have a job to do and that is deliver the news.  They have to be able to keep going and finish the segement no matter how stupid the next one is.  "The show must go on" as they say. 

Maybe some are excited by it and see it as a means to further their agenda or get more face time, but I really doubt most feel that way just because they don't break down on scree for the audience.

[NancysSummerSip]

Apr 17, 2013 15:51:32 GMT -5 TheHaitian said:

Is it me or does it seems the journalist on TV just seem to live for chaos/tragedy. Yes. I've known a few in the business.

It feels like some of them cannot even be bothered to show some empathy or pretend to be saddened by the situation. Not their job. Their job is to gather the facts and deliver them honestly, logically and within a certain time frame.

Is that a case of have seen it all so you become insensitive to it? Or is it my career depends on how much air time I get, the more the better so let's celebrate every tragedy? Believe me, lack of sensitivity is not the issue. Career advancement might be, but whatever the case, there's no celebrating.

I am mostly talking about those folks on TV news. How the hell do you go from announcing someone death or something as tragic and be smiling about whatever stupid news that resemble good news within seconds. Practice. You get a game face and you practice it. And yes, they cry off-camera. And in print journalism, it's the same. It can be especially hard on newspaper people, when they cover tragedy in the immediate community they serve. Often, they know the parties involved, or know someone who knows them. I've seen plenty of them crack under the pressure, and many more who were brilliant at it, and stayed that way, no matter what they had to cover.

[Tiny]

You reminded me of the song Dirty Laundry by Don Henley (1982).    I think it depends on the 'newscaster' as to how they come across when reporting tragedies.    

This also makes me wonder about the 'entertainment factor' involved with the endless retread of images and commentary when a tragedy occurs.    When does it become 'entertainment' instead of 'information/news'?       I especially wonder about this when I see interviews where a TV personality asks someone a question with an obvious answer (how do you feel?  to a person who's obviously grieving or frightened)  OR when they ask the same question (different ways) to someone in authority often again with an obvious answer.   example:  TV personality 5 minutes after a disaster has happened to someone in Authority: "Are the First Responders responding?"  Yes (you can see them in the background responding) .   "How many people have been hurt"  It's only been 10 minutes since the event happened we don't have a count yet (you can see the chaos in the background).  you get the idea.    I just turn off the TV or avoid the internet news feeds after a while when these things happen.   I can't take the endless repeating of possibly known 'facts'.  

I know the news feeds need to do something... I just don't know what would be more helpful or productive.  

[Regis]

Reminds me of this rant by Casey Kasem (recorded but off air):

"See, when you come out of those up-tempo goddamn numbers, man, it’s impossible to make those transitions, and then you gotta go into somebody dying. You know, they do this to me all the time. I don’t know what the hell they do it for, but God damn it if we can’t come out of a slow record. I don’t understand it. Is Don on the phone? Okay. I want a goddamn concerted effort to come out of a record that isn’t a fucking up-tempo record every time I do a goddamn death dedication! Now make it—and I also wanna know what happened to the pictures I was supposed to see this week! This is the god—last goddamn time. I want somebody to use his fucking brain to not come out of a goddamn record that is—that’s up-tempo and I gotta talk about a fucking dog dying!”

[kgb18]

Before I answer the questions, disclaimer in case Carl doesn't know, but I am a crime reporter for a newspaper.

Is it me or does it seems the journalist on TV just seem to live for chaos/tragedy.

To a certain extent, all hard news journalists do. Well, not necessarily tragedy, but chaos, yes.

It feels like some of them cannot even be bothered to show some empathy or pretend to be saddened by the situation.

Sometimes I'm sad or have empathy, sometimes I don't. It just depends on the situation. But, especially for television people, they can't show it on air. What really irks me is that a lot of the television people pretend to be nice or sympathetic to get an interview, and they don't really care. If I'm expressing sympathy or concern, it's because I mean it, regardless of whether or not I get the interview.

Is that a case of have seen it all so you become insensitive to it? Or is it my career depends on how much air time I get, the more the better so let's celebrate every tragedy?

I don't think there is ever celebrating, even with the television reporters. But, yes, you do become sort of desensitized to a lot of things. Some things will always bother me, like crimes against children, but a lot of it is just another day.

I am mostly talking about those folks on TV news. How the hell do you go from announcing someone death or something as tragic and be smiling about whatever stupid news that resemble good news within seconds.

I could never work for the television news. They do tend to be much more brash and intrusive and sometimes they are insensitive, though that tends to be certain individuals. Television news (especially local news) is so watered down. A complex story becomes a 30-second clip. I hate that.

[Deleted]

Apr 17, 2013 15:51:32 GMT -5 TheHaitian said:

Is it me or does it seems the journalist on TV just seem to live for chaos/tragedy.

It feels like some of them cannot even be bothered to show some empathy or pretend to be saddened by the situation.

Is that a case of have seen it all so you become insensitive to it? Or is it my career depends on how much air time I get, the more the better so let's celebrate every tragedy?

I am mostly talking about those folks on TV news. How the hell do you go from announcing someone death or something as tragic and be smiling about whatever stupid news that resemble good news within seconds.

I haven't watched TV for a couple of years. If that says it much.

I think a lot of news we watch these days is sensationalized to the maximum to grab our  attention span. Which is very short. That's what pretty much sum up way I feel about TV news.

[zdaddy]

I used to work as a reporter and my wife still works as a newspaper editor. From my experience, local news professionals are going to be a bit more empathetic during a tragedy. After all, they live in the community and may know some of the victims. The national reporters are going to fly in, do the story, and get out. You also need to be, how should I say it, a bit of a sociopath or at least an extreme narcissist to make it on the national level since the competition is so cutthroat.

Nevertheless, just like police/fire/medical, you need to be able to turn off your emotions are you won't be able to get your job done. I remember a story where a 2-year-old was chopped to pieces by his mom's live-in boyfriend.There was another story where I arrived early to a scene to see a pregnant woman's smoldering body being brought out of a house fire. I'd handle it by going to get good and drunk that evening, but in the moment you need to just focus on your job.

At any rate, journalism is a very tough gig and I wish reporters got a lot more credit for the hard work they do.

[Chocolate Lover]

Apr 17, 2013 16:19:38 GMT -5 Tiny said:

You reminded me of the song Dirty Laundry by Don Henley (1982).    I think it depends on the 'newscaster' as to how they come across when reporting tragedies.    

This also makes me wonder about the 'entertainment factor' involved with the endless retread of images and commentary when a tragedy occurs.    When does it become 'entertainment' instead of 'information/news'?       I especially wonder about this when I see interviews where a TV personality asks someone a question with an obvious answer (how do you feel?  to a person who's obviously grieving or frightened)  OR when they ask the same question (different ways) to someone in authority often again with an obvious answer.   example:  TV personality 5 minutes after a disaster has happened to someone in Authority: "Are the First Responders responding?"  Yes (you can see them in the background responding) .   "How many people have been hurt"  It's only been 10 minutes since the event happened we don't have a count yet (you can see the chaos in the background).  you get the idea.    I just turn off the TV or avoid the internet news feeds after a while when these things happen.   I can't take the endless repeating of possibly known 'facts'.  

I know the news feeds need to do something... I just don't know what would be more helpful or productive.  

After they've given you all the details and there's nothing new to say. I don't need the life story of everyone involved in every tragic event, but we get them every time. They need to fill the air time between the original news and the gap there always is while they wait on concrete answers from the investigating body. They seem to think we'll forget that something blew up/burnt down/crashed if they don't keep it in our faces at EVERY opportunity. 

Can you tell the 24 news cycle irritates me no end?