Michael Jackson died last week, and we haven’t been able to hear the end of it. From what will happen to his kids, the cancelled tour, Neverland Ranch… the American Media Machine will not stop playing this one-note samba.
And for most of us, we already know MJ is dead. Unless there’s further news that he’s come back like some George Romero zombie, nothing much else is really going to be news.
Complaining about what the media concentrates on when they concentrate on something silly isn’t new. What makes me a little uneasy, however, is that the big news item before that was that Iran might actually throw off the yoke of the Mullahs and demand a real democracy. What was the outcome? You’ll need to dig through all the “King of Pop” obituary notices to find out. (Hint: They haven’t done it yet.)
For all the interest news organizations try to convince us they have in social media, they don’t seem terribly interested in using it to gauge what people actually want/need to hear about. Pandering comments like, “let’s see what those wacky kids are ‘Tweeting’ about,” does not make CNN aware of social conversations.
Frankly, Michael Jackson death news trends higher on Twitter when CNN insists on reporting about it – but Iranian news coverage continues to be high because interested parties around the world keep writing about it. So does CNN miss the point of Twitter when they report people’s tweets on this non-news story? It seems to me if you’re reporting what most people are writing about whatever subject you choose to search for, you ignore what the majority of people are talking about.