Directly following Miley Cyrus’ asinine performance at the Video Music Awards, it seemed as if every corner of the Internet swelled with commentary on the pop singer’s desperate publicity stunt. And as expected, the satire empire that is The Onion took it upon themselves to not only comment on the shenanigan, but also shift the focus to where it was deserved—mass media and the news outlets that turned what should have been a public embarrassment into an issue of national concern.
On Aug. 26, The Onion posted a fake op-ed accredited to CNN.com’s managing editor Meredith Artley entitled “Let Me Explain Why Miley Cyrus’ VMA Performance Was Our Top Story This Morning.” The piece can be summarized with the following statement taken from the article: “Those of us watching on Google Analytics saw the number of homepage visits skyrocket the second we put up that salacious image of Miley Cyrus dancing half nude on the VMA stage. But here’s where it gets great: We don’t just do a top story on the VMA performance and call it a day. No, no. We also throw in a slideshow called ‘Evolution of Miley,’ which, for those of you who don’t know, is just a way for you to mindlessly click through 13 more photos of Miley Cyrus. And if we get 500,000 of you to do that, well, 500,000 multiplied by 13 means we can get 6.5 million page views on that slideshow alone. Throw in another slideshow titled ‘6 ‘don’t miss’ VMA moments,’ and it’s starting to look like a pretty goddamned good Monday, numbers-wise.”
And that’s exactly it—journalism is a business of numbers. A BUSINESS. Meaning for-profit, for personal gain, for themselves. And even though this op-ed was indeed a fake story, all effective satire makes a mockery of the truth. The idea that news outlets choose stories based on what the public deserves to know is simply naive. If that were the case, the average individual’s knowledge of our potential involvement in a Syrian civil war, in which we support the “rebels” of Al Qaeda, would be much greater than it is. The fact of the matter is, transparency is only clear as public interest allows it to be. If CNN were guaranteed the same number of hits on an article of legitimate substance as they are on a meaningless non-issue regarding a celebrity performing a routine dreamed up by a money-hungry publicist, perhaps things would be different.
So that poses the question: Can a for-profit industry perform a genuine civil service with the public’s best interest at heart? Or, as demonstrated through CNN.com, HuffPost and countless other news sources, is economics the deciding factor in what we accept as “public interest?” It’s sad to say that the present state of affairs is in shambles, yet our media are more concerned with appearances, fads, trends and gossip rather than the pressing issues at hand. But those are the stories that sell. And until public interest shifts toward legitimate issues, this is how things will stay.
Nikki is a junior majoring in communication arts. Questions or comments? Please send all feedback to opinion@dailycardinal.com.
