As IF Times

link Newspaper bane: Nobody reads the stories.

One of the great consequences of the trend towards packaging news and entertainment into bite sized pieces for the modern A.D.D. culture is that much of the depth of information is lost.  Ironically, at a time in history when there has never been as much information, news and entertainment so readily available to so many, people are as uninformed as ever about events that affect their lives.

In the news business, this can arguably be traced back to the appearance of USA Today, a publication that was novel when it first appeared in the early ’80’s.  In many ways, this paper set the trend for the format of how news was to be presented as we see it today.  Up until its appearance, most newspapers were uniformly drab in appearance and pedestrian in their reportage.  When USA Today showed up, there was color on the pages, there were quick headlines supported by only short write-ups.  The paper was made for the hurried commuter interested only in scanning the headlines of news, sports and entertainment on a given workday.

Then the 24 hour news channels started up, the pioneer of which was CNN. All of a sudden, it was essential to fill the airwaves with ‘news’, but in short headline style delivery.  With the advent of the internet, Google, Yahoo and Bing News supplanted cable stations and newspapers as being primary sources of information.  It’s important to note the distinction between the modern news sources and the older newspapers.  Google, Bing and Yahoo are only aggregators of news, they actually don’t create it.   Their role is to cast as wide a net as possible to capture the most eyeballs to their sites.  While this may seem  democratic and in the spirit of free markets, in reality, the editors of those sites wield powerful control over the content which is presented on their sites thereby influencing public opinion as newspapers did in past generations.  The difference is that there are no editorial columns on the sites of the news aggregators; the influence is through the selection of stories that get to be featured prominently in their links.

For example, the influence of Justin Bieber in our culture (outside of the pimply set ) is wildly exaggerated by virtue of regular breathless stories of his exploits on any given day.  Same with Lindsay Lohan, P. Diddy, or any of the Kardashians.  We are bombarded by the inane and insane outbursts by such as Al Sharpton and Al Gore who are given platforms well beyond what they could muster if not aided by a willing media.  I suspect that most people never even bother to read the underlying stories, since the content is pretty much expected given the personalities involved.  Why bother to read the body of the story, since we know a story involving Sharpton involves imagined racism and a story involving Gore involves imagined warming.

The real sea change however is the art of headline writing.  To catch peoples’ attentions, dramatic headlines are the hook by which readers are drawn in.  In fact, headline writing continues as a skill in itself and if done correctly, obviates the need to read an entire story.  I recall years ago when Nikita Kruschev passed away; the headline was: “Top Red Dead”.  Today, we have reportage of Anthony Wiener’s brazen campaign for mayor in New York City offering headlines such as “Weiner support getting soft” or “Weiner support shrinking” and his response which states, “Wiener sticking it out”.   The President even waded into the situation by chastising Wiener.  So of course, the headline is “Obama beats Wiener”.

Perhaps no one today is as adept at the “story in a headline” technique as Matt Drudge in his eponymous  Drudge Report.  From nowhere 10 years ago to inarguably the most powerful media figure today (next to Roger Ailes ) his news site brings the top stories of the day concisely and bluntly.  As an example, the top headlines in today’s Drudge lists the following:

Local Tenn. Bar Accused of Implementing a ‘Horrible and Discriminating’ ‘No Thug’ Dress Code – Right 180 News.

There was a time when the classic ” No shirt, no shoes, no service” sign was hung up at the entry to restaurants and that decree was accepted and followed.   Generally in an harmonious society, people try to get along without creating too much fuss around themselves.  As the virus of narcissism has infected society at large, the notion of blending in has been supplanted by the need for self expression, as in “look at me, I’m special”.

As most people who have been raised on the Mr. Rogers credo of ‘you are special’ are unaware of, if everyone is special, then no one is.   When people adopt a manner of dress, it says much about not only who they are but also who they identify with.  It’s not just a matter of deciding to wear the head bandana that day because of bad hair.  Nobody wears  their hair in a Mohawk as a means of self expression.  It’s about shock value and a need to draw the attention of other people.  In a similar vein, but less in your face,  we’ll see people who aspire to be part of the Harley Davidson tribe wearing their standard jeans, boots and black leather costumes.  They don’t do it to be individuals, they do it to be part of the tribe.

It’s amusing to see that the writer of the above linked article describes Tennessee’s Bar Louie policy as “horrible and discriminating”.  Really? If you were in said restaurant with your family noshing the daily special, would you want to be seated next to people who looked like they modeled for the FBI most wanted poster?  Apart from the Harley crowd, most normal people don’t dress like thugs and outlaws unless, well, they were thugs and outlaws.   This is the same syndrome that was addressed during the initiative to clean up New York city back in the 80’s and 90’s, called the broken window theory.

The theory was that broken windows and graffiti be fixed and cleaned up in neighborhoods as soon as possible as a tonic for crime and squalor.  It was theorized that one broken window attracted more broken windows (and graffiti) which was an implicit acceptance of crime in that area.  Showing no tolerance for even one broken window demonstrated a commitment to keep the unsavory elements out of the neighborhood.   When you have people in gang regalia frequenting restaurants, you have essentially the beginnings of broken windows.

It’s unclear to me why restaurants shouldn’t be able to dictate their own policies of dress.  In many places today, a tie is still required.  If customers don’t have one, the establishment will loan them one.  If gang wanna be’s don’t have regular clothes, then perhaps they can be offered burlap sacks to wear whilst dining.   Or they can go the to Biker bars, where the gang look is coveted and encouraged.