As bombs and missiles rain on Baghdad, reality TV can get no more real.
The TV commentator said it best: “We can see it. We can hear it.” She might have added, “Right now, while you watch.”
There’s nothing like a war to showcase television’s ability to deliver instant news. Television knows drama, and that includes bringing you face to face with life and death from the comfort of your Barcalounger.
So when I asked a group of readers where they are getting war news, I wasn’t surprised by their answers. Television.
Some report spending six, even nine, consecutive hours mesmerized by television in a way they haven’t experienced since Sept. 11, 2001.
But what about newspapers?
“Especially during wartime, a daily newspaper is outdated by the time it gets to the newsstand or doorstep,” wrote Dan Shortridge of Wooster. “Papers shouldn’t even try to compete in the breaking news arena with CNN.”
Or as Bill Jelen of Lake Township said, “We have live, 24/7 coverage from embedded press all night long. It seems pointless to read the Beacon at 7 a.m. when at least six to eight hours have passed and I’ve been able to watch it unfold.”
Still, TV coverage of the war has its critics.
“I hate television coverage of any event. It is too much like entertainment, and I don’t think the real tragedy and suffering of others should be entertaining,” said Leslie Baus of Orrville.
“I find one of the more important aspects of print coverage is that the time lag `weeds out’ some of the rumor, false reports and speculation found on the air,” said Kimara Andreas of Cuyahoga Falls.
Pat Hays of Ravenna referred to television’s “vast, renewable, 24-hour-a-day vacuum to fill.” She asked: “Do they know the meaning of stopping for a moment to pause and think, to absorb the meaning of what was just said? Nothing is ever as good, or as bad, as first reported on TV.”
Steve Godar of the Portage Lakes area wants his newspaper to complement his TV viewing. “What do I expect to get from TV? Up-to-the-minute coverage, details, commentary. What do I look for in your print publications? A refined overview of what I have been watching on TV.”
Detailed maps, lists and charts help readers make sense of TV.
“For comprehensiveness, thoroughness, for details, for related news, for color, background information, analyses and graphics like charts, maps, illustrations, I rely mostly on the BJ,” said Marv Deaton of Akron.
Jelen, the TV viewer mentioned earlier, wants more maps and summaries. “And, now that I have just consumed another four hours of CNN, maybe a timeline recap of what happened when. Give me the hour-by-hour graph of how things unfolded, because I am starting to lose track.”
Others are looking to the Internet for the best of both worlds — the immediacy of broadcast and the context of print.
“One can get news about the war everywhere; every, every, everywhere. Talk about overkill,” said Marilyn Byrne of Kent. “I do read the news online because it’s shorter and directly to the point. I use the radio, too, because the news at the top of the hour is also brief and direct.”
Mark Clayman of Akron has been checking Internet sites and blogs, where reporters post diary entries directly from the war front. “The biggest change since Gulf War 1 is the massive expansion of available info on the Net.”
Aaron Miller, 15, said he doesn’t remember the 1991 Gulf War. This time, he’s looking at all media.
“I have found that whenever I look on the Internet for information, I find nothing about what I want to know. I guess I don’t have the time or the patience to spend a half-hour looking for a decent article.”
What about TV? “At least I know that if I need to know what’s going on, I can turn on CNN.”
Finally, the Hoover High ninth-grader had this to say about newspapers: “I will probably look to the A-section of the paper every day just to get everything straight before I turn on the TV and start flipping through channels, looking for some good war coverage.”
Pat Sargent finds the real-time war coverage surreal. “Seems like a video game with analysis.” The Akron reader said she limits her TV viewing because it produces such terrible sadness.
“What a disconnect! Here we are, viewing the bombing as it happens, then turning away to see the daffodils peeking out of the mulch.”
For me, that’s the most amazing aspect of this war’s coverage. Live, in-your-face TV has shortened the distance between participant and observer compared to previous wars.
Let’s face it, most people have never seen anything like Friday’s massive bombardment of Baghdad. I was shocked by the deadly power of it, and awed that I could witness such destruction from the comfort of my Barcalounger.
I wonder whether that will affect our views of future wars. I wonder whether we’ve made war a little more made-for-TV and a little less real.
