He said, she said
Word wars start with an ambush interview to get some news subject to comment on some hot issue like the appointment of an adversary to a regulatory position, or a threat to investigate a deal, a simple child custody tug-of-war between ex-couples, or the charge of mass cheating in the elections. From the outpouring of words and the lack of restraint, some sound bite is extracted and made into a headline. A provocative quote (The people’s voices have been hijacked) is bannered on the front pages.
The nasty exchange of words is off and running after the ascribed party is asked to comment.
Disagreement and strife between highprofile personalities are the stuff of media stories. And family conflicts are preferred most of all — couples splitting up and then getting back together and planning to get married, boardroom struggles for control of a conglomerate, or a government agency with a vacationing leader who likes to grab all the credit. Such internal conflicts provide more drama as past histories are shared and the current conflict is traced to some divergence at some point when relatives and friends turn on each other.
In all this, the combatants, after exchanging salty language privately, respond to media queries on the feud with feigned surprise. The now familiar assurance is given in public that there really is no feud in the first place as the two sides just had lunch last week and ordered the same steak. This artificial conflict is being fueled by media which promote this type of controversy to get higher ratings. That the two combatants actually just exchanged gifts (Look what he gave me) and can’t wait to meet again for their next lunch before Christmas, so what’s all the fuss about? Besides, name- calling and bombast are part of the job description.
Reporting on feuds is not confined to politics or entertainment. Business journalism has gotten into the “fast feud” arena too and now no longer discusses price-earnings ratio, market share, innovations, or returns on investments. It focuses on personal animosity within a company, among shareholder blocks, between titans taking over and being taken over, between new hires and the old guards, and between regulatory agencies and the companies they supervise and pesky barriers they impose on doing business in this country. Treat us with tenderness, please… or words to that effect.
It is not surprising that such media emphasis on quarrels quickly evolves into an obsession not on issues but on personalities. This focus substitutes feud for thought.
Coverage based on hostility between persons entails looking for villains, rather than the issues involved. The finger-pointing exercise of he- said- she- said gets heated specially with the inevitable exaggerations encouraged by media hype. ( Ma’am, he called you an elephant in the room.)
Even natural disasters that used to concentrate on storm warnings and rescue efforts become a blame game of who is responsible for the mess after the typhoon left the Philippine Area of Irresponsibility.
The emphasis on personalities and feuds characterize public life. Thus party politics does not even pretend to be about ideas, but about alliances around dominant personalities, usually the winners. The ascent of parties is measured not in the advancement of their ideas but in the level of defections they can attract. This always happens after an election.
When confronted with a crisis, our first instinct is to fix the blame, rather than look for a solution. The priority when anything goes wrong is to find out who was responsible — who approved this thing and which camp does this particular villain belong to?
Reporting in all areas of politics, business, and even religion (it has its own whistle-blowers) has become tabloid movie reporting. It feasts on personal intrigues, who’s up, who’s down, who’s in, who’s out, who’s now making top money, who’s sleeping with whom, or who split from whom. These are now the same questions being asked of politicians, businessmen, and religious leaders.
Perhaps, in the movie business, personality reporting is justified. After all, celebrities are what movies are about, and rivalries on billings and talent fees make personal feuds inevitable.
Issues seem too challenging to explain in their complexity. It’s easier to look for villains… and very seldom any heroes.
When confronted with a crisis, our first instinct is to fix the blame, rather than look for a solution.