I have reflected upon recent events and think I have spotted a cultural trend; the Rise of Rumor.
Consider:
Hurricane Katrina. News agencies reported all sorts of odd rumors. For exampl, helicopters being shot at. It never happened. In addition, how the heck would someone in a helicopter KNOW he was being shot at? You can’t hear a darn thing in a chopper.
This horrible incident in West (by God) Virginia. Not only did the wrong news get out, it spread like cellular wildfire. Further it was picked up by Real Reporters.
Are rumors increasing in number, or are more people believing in them? Or am I imaging something that is not really there?
No rumors are not rising (no cite). The fact is, IMHO, people will say anything and people will believe anything. Wild Assed Speculation has always been a big thing and always will be. On a slow news day reporters have been known to…make things up (again, no cite). Always has been, always will be. The thing that has changed is the fact that information can be moved around much faster today than say, fifty years ago (pulled that number out of my ass). I believe that bad (unreliable) news travels much faster than facts, again IMHO.
Maybe I should find a more productive way to spend my Sunday mornings!
hlanelee took the words out of my mouth - everyone has a cellphone now, everyone has a web connection, and news is disseminted faster. I do think that major outlets have gotten more sloppy, however, in their attempts to be the first with the news - Used to be that unless the news was earth shattering, there would be a discussion about it at the appointed time on the evening news, and unless it was HUGE (i.e. something like the JFK assasisnation), the most that would happen would be a news flash breaking into normal programming. Most people got most of their news in the evening paper or the nightly news at 6:00. Now we have 24 hours news networks, and they can’t just have dead air (I’m reminded of a Daily show bit regarding the man who was shot by an air marshal recently - it showed a relatively long montage of major network snippets - all of the news clips essentially said ‘Well Ted, we have no idea what is happening and it’s too early to speculate’ and proceeded to ask rhetorical questions about what was going on onscreen or speculate on what happened. Any grain of news that can be splashed on the webpage or on your ‘breaking news’ event is a victory becuase our major news outlets now are reporting on the spot and want to ensure they are the first to say what will be repeated on webpages, blogs, other channels and in breakrooms across the nation (and whether or not what they say is true won’t come to light for another hour or so). Used to be that there was at least a little bit of time before a ‘fact’ was uncovered by the press and it was related to the public, but now news unfolds to the public NOW, and waiting that 2 hours or so to confirm what that source said might mean that CNN already reported what you are reporting an hour ago! So I don’t think rumors are up, they are disseminated much more quickly due to technology and are given more weight due to changes in the way the news business works. This is just IMO, I am watching eagerly to see other people’s take on it.
I will grant you that the ‘pressure to publish’ is a reason for a rise of rumor, but that sort of implies something seems to be happening. Certainly more wild-eyed nut-jobs are actually getting on TV (or the internet, or the cell phone, both of which are almost as good).
All of these recent examples have convinced me to stay calm and not believe what I see on TV. I have also renewed my oath to never talk to the Press.
In college, I took some classes with noted rumor expert Fred Koenig. Oddly enough, that link is him addressing Katrina rumors on NPR. You canb listen to the story on-line to learn more about how rumors arise. His research and consulting work stretched back to the 1960’s and I took his classes before the vast majority of people had ever heard of the internet. All of it was documented as a phenomena before.
Not sure about rumors per se, but as the television media outlets race to out trump each other, they fill the airwaves with uninformed speculation and worst-case scenarios–all calculated to whip up mass hysteria and guarantee marathon viewing.
It’s nothing new-- it may have even been worse in the past, when people had to rely on word-of-mouth for their news.
I work in a museum, and part of my job involves reading old diaries. It’s really interesting to read people’s accounts of what they’ve heard when historical events occured-- some of the rumors surrounding Lincoln’s assasination, for example, or amazing tales of rescues and miraculous survival in wartime.
The news media was even worse, sometimes completely inventing stories, such as two rival papers in New York during the 1800s who kept one-upping one another about the investigation of a grisly murder which never took place.
The “problem” is a combination of factors, but the primary factor is the state of our communications and transportation technology. The press can do a lot of despicable things, including reporting unsubstantiated information in an attempt to be first with the news and doctoring and/or posing photographs that are supposed to be spontaneous.
During Katrina, there are two things that burned the significance of the catastrophe into my mind and I’m thankful for the jolt to my complacency.
One was a “filler” man-on-the-street interview before the full horror of the broken levees was realized in which a (junior?) reporter stopped a man walking with two small children only to have him reveal that, hoping his family had safe haven on the roof of their house, his wife had been torn from his grasp and lost when the house split in two from the force of the rising waters. Even the reporter had a difficult time keeping her composure while the man told his story.
The second was a picture taken during the evacuation of the convention center. A 5-year old(?) black child holding the hand of a 90(?) year old white woman in a wheelchair as they exited the building, escorted by armed police. Although I often wonder at what their respective stories might have been, that photo, for me, epitomized the enormity of the disaster and the piteousness of our response.
I can sometimes excuse the 95% chaff and fluff for moments like these. What I can’t excuse is the characterization of people’s actions that seem based on factors other than their immediate circumstances (i.e., “looting” vs. “foraging”).
What I can’t excuse is a series of photographs I saw depicting the Israeli withdrawal from settlements in the West Bank where photos showing Israelis were bathed in sunshine and light and those showing (usually cheering) Palistinians were dark, overcast and brooding; where the razing of one of those settlements by Israelis was framed by a torn Palistinian flag, as if some heinous crime were being perpetrated by them. I only thank the photographer for being so inept as to make these bastardizations of the situation so obvious.
As long as we realize that “breaking news” is usually a mish-mash of usually unsubstantiated information from a variety of sources, we should be able to maintain our sanity. As far as people’s reaction to these reports, it is nothing new. The War of the Worlds radio broadcast in 1938 illicited some weird responses too. It must be human nature to grab the ball and run with it.
