I’m not sure how many of you have ever had interviews with the news, but I have had more than I like and some that could have gone controversial. One issue in particular opened my eyes to how the media operates. There was a safety issue that kept popping up. Once we at the City identified it, I knew exactly what happened. It was a state project, so I expressed the error to TDOT, and it got corrected. It was so bad that I probably had 4-5 interviews on the subject. In at least 2 of the interviews, the reporter sensed something was wrong and kept hounding me and trying me to say something bad about TDOT. In the interview, I knew exactly what they were trying to do, and I stepped right around it.
As it was, I wasn’t the lead story. Something more sensational took that spot. I had the power to create a lead story though if I wanted. I could have made people look bad and created a firestorm about a process I’m still not sure is the most transparent practice. Instead, I took the diplomatic approach and was the second story on the 6 o’clock news.
Lesson learned: in media, the sensational or the inflammatory always sells first.
The peeks behind the curtains that I’ve had only confirm my suspicion that the news stories we see from the major outlets are the most extreme, most sensational stories out there. They’re in the business of selling fear, anger, disgust, political and controversy. It’s not about the middle ground.
Sure this is a serious illness (especially in places like New York), but pardon me for being calloused at what the media is feeding the populous. All I see is fear mongering to scare people into behaving like they think we should behave.
