It seems to me that news “reporters” in television, delivering news accompanied by a soliloquy of personal opinion and interpretation is a fairly new development. It came along with television networks actually owned by a person, people, or groups of people who take license because they can.
When I was a kid, news was what happened – as best as we could tell from the evidence and witnesses – not anyone’s interpretation thereof. Though, most likely, nothing was ever completely pure, its delivery certainly was less discretionary than much of today’s private stations’ news compilations, sound bites and edits.
At Chatterbox, we’ve talked before about pundits expounding on what we heard – delivering the news as they see it. We’ve talked about too many show hosts clipping interviews to fit the network’s views (no prejudice here; it goes both ways) and all those shows following up speeches and debates with translations for us. It’s not that they think we don’t know what we heard, but that they want to replace it with their spin on what we heard.
Recently, one news anchor asked her guest a question, but she didn’t get the answer she was anticipating; it didn’t fit the station’s profile, and it certainly wouldn’t square with her base. In very short order, he was dismissed by her and technology. As all hosts do, even on the radio, she got the last word; the guest got disconnected.
Not only was their difference of opinion an unfair fight, but the topic was completely irrelevant at this time. We’ve talked before about truly valuable air time wasted on too much talk and opinion without enough substance and fact. Air time is often dedicated to topics that may be of great value to historians. Right now, however, they’re far less urgent when compared to addressing any critical conditions at hand, and far more irrelevant than deciding who’s responsible for them. Blame doesn’t merit current air time; solution does.
It’s important for us to decide what bears repetition and what doesn’t, and we should know nothing is as important as finding resolution. After any crisis at hand is resolved and all the data is in, it will become part of history and deliberated as repetitively as desired.
The host and her guest argued over numbers of border detainees, dates, administrations, details of refugee detainment conditions, who was really responsible for the horror, who addressed it, who ignored, who exacerbated it. The hostess even brought up the size of detainment cages and who ordered them.
Blame can be left until the suffering has been resolved. Resolution is what we need to be advocating right now. The history of their disaster is irrelevant to all the refugees who sought asylum and found imprisonment, as well as to almost all Americans. Mediating the situation quickly and fairly is what matters. That is, indeed, what we should be investing our airtime in and putting our energy into right now.
When these horrors are all resolved, we can and should discuss it finitely, punish the guilty, and offer what little recompense we can to the victims. Time, itself, will bring full disclosure and assign all parties their march to glory or infamy; it always does. The historical fallout will be permanently attached to the appropriate names forever. Only then can we complete this hellacious chapter.
Right now, however, we can’t waste valuable energy and air time to accuse, defend or judge anyone or anyone’s past action or inaction. Rewinding to examine what went wrong and who called the shot is a vain attempt to commandeer that historical judgment, as well as a theatrical distraction from the real elephants in the room.
Voltaire said, “History is the lie commonly agreed upon.” That agreement will take time, great discussion, massage, and compromise. Right now, let’s work on solutions, not accusations. While so many are suffering in stagnant misery, no one should be spinning influential wheels, and a show hosts’ focus should not be their career investment, and nothing should distract any of us from the red tape, inefficiency, and corruption that is power in politics.
We should demand better of those seeking fame and fortune while feigning their roles as reporters or analysts. Anyone of conscience with any kind of reach, influence, or visibility should be focusing on the greatest and swiftest good for those in the most dire need thereof, whether at the border or at their job.
No more divisive talk. Action. Sanctuary … something American.
Join our readers whose generous donations are making it possible for you to read our news coverage. Help keep local journalism alive and our community strong. Donate today.
