Media Sensationalism: Hurricane Edition

If you watched CNN, MSNBC, or the Weather Channel while Hurricane Irma went on a rampage in the southeast, it appeared that these media outlets were actively trying to kill their reporters. I spent a few hours on Sunday watching Chris Cuomo from CNN who was in Naples while the eye wall passed by. Was it entertaining? Yes. Was it informative? Yes. Was it safe? No. Did it boost CNN�s ratings? Most certainly. Was this whole thing just for ratings? Probably.

            An ABC reporter in Miami tied himself to a balcony during the height of the storm. An MSNBC reporter had to avoid being hit by falling branches while on camera. A cameraman from The Weather Channel fell over because of the wind in Miami and his camera went flying.

            The journalists justified their actions by claiming that they were raising awareness to the dangers of hurricanes and were trying to dissuade people from going outside during the storm. Chris Cuomo said, �We are out here so you don�t have to be.�

            Personally, I think that is a pretty bad explanation. The little kid in me saw those reporters in the storm and wanted to go experience it for himself. He saw the monstrous gusts of wind and rain and wondered in awe rather than becoming frightened. It�s like when you�re a kid and your mom tells you to not touch the hot pan. You touch the hot pan. It�s what you do.

            Beyond this lame explanation, the real reason CNN and ABC sent their reporters to witness the power of Irma was simply for ratings. As I watched Cuomo on CNN, I was glued to the TV as I waited for the eyewall to pass and the storm surge to crash down on Naples. It was intense and extremely interesting. It�s no wonder why CNN�s ratings skyrocketed on Sunday.

            This incident is just more proof that most media outlets have become machines of sensationalism. These outlets are businesses at the end of the day. While their primary function is to report the news and inform the public, they also need ratings in order to make money and be successful companies. To achieve those ratings, they need to attract the viewers. These outlets will go to great lengths to attract those viewers. If you remember the disappearance of the Malaysia Airlines flight in 2014, it caused quite a buzz. CNN cashed in on that buzz and for about a month it was ALL they talked about. There were holographic models of planes, actual models of planes, and reporters inside of planes. Don Lemon even started discussing conspiracy theories about the plane�s disappearance on his show. At the time, it was not the most important story that needed to be covered in the world. But CNN and other outlets were hooked and the reasoning behind it was plane simple: ratings (pun intended).

            In more recent times, the cow that has been constantly milked for ratings has been Donald Trump, specifically the Russia collusion scandal surrounding his administration. For about 5 hours on Sunday while I watched the coverage of Hurricane Irma a miracle occurred. CNN did not mention him. For the time being, they had found a better cow to milk. I joked that President Trump was angry about the hurricane, not because of the damage it was causing in Florida, but because it temporarily stole his spotlight.

            This situation raises an important question: Is media sensationalism during a hurricane or something similar a good thing? While the underlying reason behind the hurricane�s coverage was ratings, the warnings and advice that media outlets gave out all week were very helpful in persuading people to evacuate. They overhyped the storm, but maybe that is a good thing. It made people take precautions and prepare for the worst. Their use of diction by calling the storm a �monster� and that it was �pounding� the Caribbean was effective in frightening people and made them take the threat seriously.

            In response to the question I asked in the last paragraph I say, �Yes.� In the case of a hurricane or other disasters, the media�s influence on society must be sensational in order to make people take a threat seriously.

            However, the thirst for ratings extends that sensationalism to places like politics where it does not belong. That is where the public grows a distrust for the media. As long as ratings control the media, there will be widespread sensationalism. Sometimes it is good. Sometimes it is bad. As a viewer and a consumer of news, I always take what I read or hear with a grain of salt. That�s all for this week.