A committed liberal in my life sent me a message last week, reading, "If all this Teddy Kennedy coverage makes ME want to vomit, what must it be doing to people who disagreed with him politically? If these talking heads can even remember the name Mary Jo Kopechne, I bet they couldn't spell it."
The Boston Globe began one of its obit pieces: "TED KENNEDY was not a great man."
So with a figure as divisive and storied as Kennedy, what is the right tone to strike in coverage and how much coverage should we have?
NPR's ombudsman tackles some of the issues.
How much is enough? How does the timing of the death play into coverage choices? Farrah Fawcett's death might have been a fairly major news story until Michael Jackson died unexpectedly shortly after. How do we cover flawed individuals with honesty while still respecting the truth? Did you know what Chappquiddick was or who Kopechne was? Does that matter?
Sunday, September 6, 2009
Passing of a Kennedy
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Mary Jo Kopechne was a name I knew only after my father explained to me what had happened back in 69. While burying the dead alongside their mistakes and bad decisions is looked down upon, it should also not be ignored. Some say Kennedy got away with murder and others say it was an accident but either way what price did he pay? He received a two month suspended sentence and continued to be involved in politics. His fame and family name kept him safe while any other average human being would have received a much harsher punishment. He is one of the many examples proving that America does not punish those who do wrong but instead encourage wrong doing to create drama, scandal and essentially, fame.
I agree with Katharina that America focuses too heavily on fame and fortune. Ted Kennedy, Farrah Fawcett and Michael Jackson were human beings just like the rest of us, yet their names have been in the news for weeks/months after their deaths. They did important things in our country and deserve respectful memorials, but the media need to learn when to let go of a story. By overcoving stories they risk repelling the audiences they wish to draw in.
I also struggled with this question this summer as Michael Jackson's death took over all the main media outlets. I wondered what kind of light you could put him in, especially when the worst of him was in our most recent memory. I was happy to see that the media focused on the more successful and memorable years that Michael Jackson had. While the troubles of his past were evident and easily accessible, they chose to take a more respectful approach by focusing on his positive contributions. While I don't think his wrongs, nor those of anyone, should go ignored, death is a sensitive subject that deserves respect.
The deaths of both Ted Kennedy and Michael Jackson make me question whether public figures consider themselves to be above the law and/or does the judicial system treat them differently because they are public figures. What I find to be interesting and slightly unnerving about the media and public is the strong followings that these two men had even though their pasts are tainted with some extremely serious issues. I feel that the professional successes of these men need to be separated from their controversial pasts in their personal lives, as both are valid and need to be talked about.
Post a Comment