In this post, I need to clarify what exactly I am NOT referring to in the purposely derisive term "bimbo." I am not attacking female journalists, even though I could make a case of the poor exercise of journalistic practice by the present trend of female reporters who ride the skirt hems of Barbara Walters without the same high standards of presenting the news. Nor am I directly criticizing the Hollywood versions of story presentation as found in Access Hollywood or Entertainment Tonight, though we are getting closer to the central issue. Nor is it the similarity of styles between the journalist of ET and the Today Show the core issue, though we may start saying "You're getting hotter," rather than "You are getting warmer."
The key issue could be encapsulated in a remark of a female anchor who appealed to "our sister network." I heard this snippet and quickly thought, can I envision Walter Cronkite saying "our sister network"? The whole piece of imaginative thought sounded awkward, almost horrific.
This is what I mean by "bimbo journalism," the presentation of news information through the strictures of a given entity, allowing the narrowness of that entity to determine news content, news emphasis, and agenda manipulation of what is "fit to print" or to "hear with ear." This stiffling of real journalistic practice can be demonstrated by several instances:
1) In the Ferguson, MO race riots, the presentation of Michael Brown as "gentle giant" leads to the suppression of Brown's ruffian behavior in a convenience store just prior to his shooting, or incidents from high school classmates that hinted he used his size and strength to bully others. They present the shot patterns of the victim as proof of excessive force, but omit to tell the audience of the common police practice of discharging pistols with rapid fire over against single shot. All this to actentuate the problem of race relations.
2) The excessive reporting on the novel Shades of Gray, pushing it to best-seller status. While other news programming other than the Today Show mentioned the downside of aggressive brutal sexuality, the NBC enterprise avoided such reporting. The publisher of the novel is part of the "sister network."
3) The flack about the scandal in the Duggar family led to reprisals which led TLC to end the airing of the show's 19 Kids and Counting reruns. While severing of corporate sponsors is highlighted, supporters of the family are not mentioned. Any interviews of members of the family are spun against them. This is done despite the case against the eldest Duggar son being resolved and its contents sealed, and the unsealing perhaps done by an activist judge at the behest of a 19 Kids competitor.
4) The present situation centered on Donald Trump's remarks about illegal Mexican immigrants. While flamboyant, the remarks are accurate, and the recent murder in San Francisco by an illegal has been suppressed as a "random incident." The bimbo journalist now tries to resolve the apparent rise of popularity of Trump and reduces it to an ingrained racism which draws us back to incidents as mentioned in the first case.
In short, bimbo journalism seeks to reduce all of important news as aspects of sociological developments towards an overly idealized version of America, a utopian foundation for progressive themes. It decries racist, and builds a case. It decries sexism, and builds a case. Vigilance is demanded of the audience to fight against the cultural flows that would reverse such themes of social progress.
Which is why I debated whether this form of journalistic practice of tailoring news items to express the utopian progressive mission should be called "bimbo journalism" or "vigilante journalism." I opted for the idea of newscasters prostituting the practice towards an agenda, a selling of journalism to achieve the desired results of "big media."
The age of information is fast becoming the age of propaganda.
No comments:
Post a Comment