Dear Laurie,

 

This is about the absurdly disproportionate media attention given to the approaching and then actual death of the iconic footballer, George Best, which casts a very illuminating light on the terrifyingly inadequate role the media (as a whole) plays in our perception and prioritisation of "reality". It is going on all the time, of course, but in the case of George Best it revealed itself in all its deeply troubling glory. Troubling because of the extremely misleading view of reality it provides. We could be (in fact, I believe we are) heading towards the biggest catastrophe in human history, but the media spotlight is pointing elsewhere (and even when it does point towards it, its pencil-thin beam fails to reveal anything like the whole picture - which it could if intelligently scanned - before being jerked elsewhere).

 

This is something which, of course, has been brought up by others. The problem is, what can be done about it? A person can only focus their attention on a relatively tiny aspect of "reality", and the media spotlight cannot possibly be everywhere (and even if it could, who would have the time to take it all in?). However, it could, if intelligently directed, over time, provide an outline of "reality" (or something approximating to it).

 

The essential question is, what directs, and determines the intensity, of the media spotlight? The example of George Best gives a clear example of just how fickle and irrational it is (not withstanding the commercial value of a big story). Dictatorships want the media spotlight to present a particular, sanitised view of "reality", while the democratic ideal is of as truthful and objective a view as possible. Yet the media spotlight is hardly directed with such an aim in mind. Because they are (or are expected to behave like) commercial enterprises, the media are primarily concerned with simply getting peoples attention, ultimately in order to sell them something and make money.

 

Because of this, the media cannot possibly perform the essential task of providing as truthful and objective a view of "reality" as possible.  What we get is a view of "reality" that cannot be other than terribly and dangerously flawed. But no one, it seems, is prepared to face up to this, least of all in the media industry itself. Why? Because it is your bread and butter, your niche in the socio-economic environment, on which you and your families depend. And a very desirable and rewarding niche for many of you it is too.

 

I've more to say about this - I believe, very important - anthropological perspective on my homepage at www.spaceship-earth.org

 

Yours sincerely