Spring Break
News outlets shun strikers
by Daniel Ortner
Arts | 11/20/07
Posted online at 9:37 PM EST on 11/19/07
With the latest news that negotiations between striking writers and film studios will recommence on Nov. 26 even while the strike continues, it's worth turning our attention to the shallow ways the media have covered and portrayed the strike so far. Looking at the news media coverage of the Writer's Guild of America strike, one would hardly believe that the strike have been going on for nearly two weeks already. Indeed, the media have played a strong role in obscuring the intensity of the strikers' demands and the depth of their overall support and has instead chosen to focus purely on the negative impacts of the strike on viewers.
Even before the strike began, as the media hurriedly attempted to show last-ditch attempts at settlement, already the news focused heavily on the direct impacts of the strike on the imperiled future of television shows. Experts offered prognoses on which shows would most likely be contested. The most heavily debated issue of the day was whether or not the new season of 24 would be aired and what would happen to Lost. However, there was some minimal attempt to study the substantive merits of the strike.
Since the strike began, the mainstream media coverage has been utterly atrocious. Using CNN.com as a typical example, we have "Get ready for Reruns: Writers hit the picket lines" (Nov. 5), "Producers: We've hunkered down for a long one" (Nov. 6), "'Housewives,' 'Office' stopped by strike" (Nov. 7), "'K-Ville', '24' latest affected by strike" (Nov. 8) and "With scripted TV running dry, what's left to be shown" (Nov. 9). Also reported was, "What will you do without TV," and the utterly inane "What will awards show hosts say without writers." All of these stories focused nearly exclusively on the negative effects of the strike on viewers, producers and actors.
In contrast, only a single article appeared on CNN.com in the same time period that substantively looked at the demands of writers: "Changing media landscape takes center stage in strike" (Nov. 8). While the existence of this article is commendable, about half of its focus was on the potential for the strike to produce a future run of shoddy reality television and other lowest-common-denominator shows.
Even before the strike began, as the media hurriedly attempted to show last-ditch attempts at settlement, already the news focused heavily on the direct impacts of the strike on the imperiled future of television shows. Experts offered prognoses on which shows would most likely be contested. The most heavily debated issue of the day was whether or not the new season of 24 would be aired and what would happen to Lost. However, there was some minimal attempt to study the substantive merits of the strike.
Since the strike began, the mainstream media coverage has been utterly atrocious. Using CNN.com as a typical example, we have "Get ready for Reruns: Writers hit the picket lines" (Nov. 5), "Producers: We've hunkered down for a long one" (Nov. 6), "'Housewives,' 'Office' stopped by strike" (Nov. 7), "'K-Ville', '24' latest affected by strike" (Nov. 8) and "With scripted TV running dry, what's left to be shown" (Nov. 9). Also reported was, "What will you do without TV," and the utterly inane "What will awards show hosts say without writers." All of these stories focused nearly exclusively on the negative effects of the strike on viewers, producers and actors.
In contrast, only a single article appeared on CNN.com in the same time period that substantively looked at the demands of writers: "Changing media landscape takes center stage in strike" (Nov. 8). While the existence of this article is commendable, about half of its focus was on the potential for the strike to produce a future run of shoddy reality television and other lowest-common-denominator shows.
Be the first to comment on this story