Ambivalent Imbroglio posted a quote from Mario Savio, of the Berkeley Free Speech Movement:
"There is a time when the operation of the machine becomes so odious, makes you so sick at heart, that you can't take part; you can't even passively take part, and you've got to put your bodies upon the gears and upon the wheels, upon the levers, upon all the apparatus, and you've got to make it stop. And you've got to indicate to the people who run it, to the people who own it, that unless you're free, the machine will be prevented from working at all!"
I'm reminded by an occasion when I worked at the assignment desk of a Bay Area TV news room. In the evening, someone from Fox News would call us for the run-down (a list of stories we'd be doing). If they thought one sounded interesting, they'd ask us to send it to them so that they could incorporate it into their national newscasts.
The problem with this situation: the two lowest people on the totem pole were having this conversation. Me, and the desk assistant at Fox News in New York. Now, the guy was very nice – I actually met him once – but he was obviously occupying a position where comprehensive historical literacy was not a prerequisite. And for that matter, neither was I.
Yet I remember having one of these run-down listing conversations after Mario Savio had died. The Bay Area station had naturally covered the story, but as I listed it off to him I was surprised when he didn't ask for it. Apparently he'd never heard of Mario Savio and had no idea why his death would have been important. I finally had to say to him, "Trust me, you want this story."
Which illustrates the problem that results when people with gaps in their awareness of the world end up making the decisions about what the world will get to be aware of.
Comments (2)
Fox being what it is, if that story had happened today, I would explain it by Fox's distaste for speaking ill of the recently dead. After all, you can't really expect Fox News to to do a piece on Savio that celebrated his life achievments? Fox would normally be more likely to do an in depth report on the "administrative foul up" that caused the state to stop dropping tear gas --or-- a piece ridiculing Savio for spending all day on top of a police car and refusing lawful authority (and perhaps being godless as well, or may harboring potential terrorists, or being a potential terrorist, and a bad influence on youth). Imagine O'Reilly (or any of the Fox Friends in the morning) saying nice things about Savio, even at a wake-- its pretty improbable.
Then again, Fox was a kinder, gentler place back when you were working at the station. And I agree that the person you were talking to wasn't making a political statement, he just didn't know who Savio was. Not that Bill O'Rielly does know who Savio was, but there is no one sentence description of Savio that could possible make O'Reilly like him.
Mark
Posted by Mark | November 19, 2005 3:55 PM
Posted on November 19, 2005 15:55
I'm not even sure Bill O'Reilly was there when I was. But as you said, everything seemed kinder and gentler back then.
And I don't attribute political animus to the refusal to take the story. Just ignorance. Which itself is a structural problem with the news business.
Posted by Cathy | November 20, 2005 8:12 AM
Posted on November 20, 2005 08:12