Looking into the notes I have made from reading Postman's Amusing Ourselves to Death, I recall reading in Chapter 7 how Christine Craft, the co-anchor of KMBC-TV hired January 1981, had been "fired in August 1981 because research indicated that her appearance 'hampered viewer acceptance'" (101). Although the KMBC television program primarily intends to be a news show, I am intrigued by the fact that the appearance of Christine Craft ended up being the cause for her to lose her co-anchor position on a news program.
This led to me thinking what was mattered most in the situation: the appearance of the newscaster or the information from the news itself?
I did some research online about the event:
http://www.newseum.org/news/2011/03/christine-craft-and-the-beauty-of-news.html
According to Newseum and some other websites to confirm my results, a "research focus group had judged Craft as 'too old, too unattractive and not deferential to men' "
Why has the appearance of a woman been targeted instead of the quality of how she has delivered the news?
In my opinion (and I may be completely different to others or even possibly wrong?), I believe that televised news appear to be not only a form of communication in the spread of information but also a form of entertainment. News programs at present do show to have humor and other surprises in the casting/live area, which is perfectly fine. However, has the public audience, although not completely, strayed away from primarily focusing on the information itself?
I too am intrigued by this topic. I feel like the way a reporter or anchor looks isn't important, but when you really think about it, who would an audience prefer: the "sexy" blonde hair and blue eyed woman or the "decent" middle aged lady? We obviously know the answer to that, but I think it's just that I do not want to believe that our society has really come down to this. We live in a world where appearance is everything and you must either doll yourself up and get somebody's attention with the tight, risqué clothing and makeup, or not even bother trying.
ReplyDeleteTelevised news is indefinitely a form of entertainment. If we cannot take action upon it, then what else is it to us? Most news today are not "action based". It is nothing more than mere information to gossip about in which we will eventually forget.
ReplyDeleteLike I have said before in a previous post, news such as 24-hour news does not usually provide any information taking action for. A murder, a fire, world disagreements; will our opinions be recognized?
it is quite amazing how society has gotten to this point.. The news is a prime example as people now seem to only focus if there is some kind of entertainment. Because the news has elements of entertainment information is able to get out to the pubic. what does the future have in store for us when evrything in our lives is becoming entertainment?
ReplyDeleteYou make a very good point James. People tend to get distracted by the appearance of the anchor than the actual news. Honestly I get distracted by the appearance of the anchor delivering the news but I never over look the news they are telling me. I also usually believe the information they are giving me. I don't think it is right that they would fire someone for not looking believable. Its sad how far our society has come.
ReplyDelete