I hate CNN. And it has nothing to do with politics.
Ever since The New York Times Online created "Times Select," forcing me to search LexisNexis in order to read David Brooks and Thomas L. Friedman, CNN.com has been my first stop to get my daily briefing on domestic and international affairs. Thus, each morning, after checking Blitz, I click my "CNN: Breaking News" online bookmark. And each morning, I am greeted with the most sensationalized abomination parading as the news. For example, Sunday morning I awoke to this list of stories: "Suspect blogged about cannibalism," "Rangers catch bear after deadly attack," "Jolie reportedly to have baby in Namibia," "'Scary Movie' laughs its way to the top," "Drug test victim may lose toes, fingers," "Iranian Group: 200 martyrs ready to attack West," "9-foot gator roams car detail shop," "We're in a (bleep) tornado!" and "Bare-bellied cheerleaders banned." There was also an article about the Pope's first Easter Mass and one about political progress in Iraq.
If I were challenged to make up a list of the most inanely trivial and worthlessly sensationalized news stories, there is a realistic chance that I would lose to CNN's starting lineup. While I recognize the nature of these stories, there is still a problem: I read them -- every gory detail. And I have the feeling that I am not alone. Today, instead of reading The New York Time's analysis of Iran's $50 million contribution to the Hamas-led Palestinian government, I read about Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie's quest for privacy which has led them to Africa and has ironically appeared on the front page of a major news website.
The problem is that I often cannot control my urge to indulge in CNN's product. I know that there is an opportunity cost; I know that I am forgoing the chance to become more worldly, but I also know 1,000 words on Japanese socio-economic trends are no match to a minute-and-a-half clip of an alligator in a car shop.
I hate CNN because it makes me feel bad about myself. I am cognizant of its mission to destroy the world's intellectualism, yet I am still a victim to it. Harboring these feelings of helplessness, I have come to the conclusion that CNN is a news service in the same way Krispy Kreme is a food provider: They both exploit the inherent weaknesses in consumers' self-control by offering an addictive product that serves minimal practical purposes.
Oh yeah, and CNN loves when little kids die. It's a disgusting thing to say, but unfortunately it is true. Few days pass when CNN does not report on some child's horrific abduction and murder. It would be one thing if they were publicizing abductions in order to help in the search, in order to inform people of the suspect and victim so that information could surface -- but that's not what they are doing. Yesterday, I was horrified to find CNN had released the graphic details of the death of 10-year-old Jamie Rose Bolin, a girl in Oklahoma abducted and killed just last Wednesday.
To sensationalize the death of a child is an egregious act. And if CNN were to argue they were doing this in order to make parents aware of the dangers associated with raising children today, I would not believe them. I have never once seen a CNN article on constructive ways for families and communities to prevent abductions, and I have never once heard of CNN's post-homicide coverage of one child help in the search for another missing child. CNN is simply profiting by commodifying tragedy and selling human drama.
In order to avoid the same tactics used by the very institution I am criticizing, I feel it is important to offer a brief analysis of and solution to the underlying issues here. First, much of this is not new. Ever since the late-19th-century media tycoons William Randolph Hearst and Joseph Pulitzer popularized "yellow journalism"-- exploiting the common man's fixation with war and death to sell their papers -- sensationalism has been a fixture in American media. CNN, to some extent, is their Internet Age counterpart.
CNN is also part of a larger modern social trend -- one partially explained by the rise in the popularity of reality TV shows and celebrity gossip magazines.
In the summer of 2000, the television show Survivor ushered in a new era in entertainment. The reality TV show trend began, and it has yet to end. Alongside reality TV came an explosion in celebrity fixation -- with some reality shows featuring celebrities (e.g., MTV Diary) and others creating them (e.g., Kelly Clarkson and Omarosa). From The Bachelorette to The Surreal Life, pop culture has become saturated with quasi-celebrities being quasi-entertaining. And even worse than the prevalence of shows has been the explosion in celebrity gossip. When the majority of Americans can provide you with weekly updates on the status of Katie Holmes and Tom Cruise's soap opera-esque relationship, it is clear that there is a problem.
Clearly, there is a demand for drama to be "real," and CNN, by providing celebrity updates and sensationalizing other stories, is just another corporation meeting that demand. The unfortunate thing is that CNN is in a position to help fix this problem, to wean America off its celebrity and "reality" addictions. Instead, it just pretends to be a legitimate news provider. To some extent, CNN is Us Weekly for those who refuse to read Us Weekly. CNN just feigns reputability in order to appeal to a slightly different audience.
The solution to these problematic trends is simple to explain and nearly impossible to implement: eliminate the demand. Read rewarding and informative news sources. And after reading Sunday's list of stories, I have found the strength to implement my part of the solution; I have decided to quit CNN.com cold turkey. It will be challenging, but I will ignore pregnant celebrities and scantily clad cheerleaders. I'm just worried about not watching nomadic alligators with an affinity for car shops -- those get me every time.