NOTEBOOK: Simplistic storytelling on TV news pushing nation to war

By David McElroy · February 23, 2012

Cleaning out the notebook again…

Cable news can rot your brain and make you crazy. A place where I’ve been going a lot recently almost always has a TV on cable news. After being subjected to this garbage for awhile, I sort of understand why so many people favor going to war — or at least “intervening” — in countries with oppressive dictators. The simplistic, emotional and context-free reports from television leave the impression that the obvious right thing to do is to intervene.

It seems that most people have seen so many simplistic television shows and movies — and TV news mirrors that simplicity — that they believe fixing complex problems is simple and easy. It’s maddening, because the solutions aren’t as easy as implied by the narratives laid out on news channels.

Speaking of wars, I’m worry about what’s going on in Iran. I’m not making a prediction about what’s going to happen there, because there are too many possible scenarios. But I can see the very real possibility of it leading to a large war that most people don’t want — all because the small players there are aligned with bigger powers outside the region.

If Israel attacks Iran, there’s a possibility that Russia could try to intervene to defend Iran. The Russians have already been warning Israel not to attack. If Russia gets involved — which might not even happen, of course — there’s going to be a lot of internal pressure here for the United States to get involved on the other side. Wasn’t there some big war nearly a hundred years ago that was triggered by an assassination simply because big powers were aligned with the players in a smaller-scale conflict? The Iran-Israel conflict isn’t exactly the same, but it’s similar enough to bring World War I to mind for me.

Did you watch Wednesday night’s GOP presidential debate? I didn’t. Other than catching a few specific segments on YouTube, I haven’t seen a single debate during this campaign cycle. It keeps me saner not to get frustrated with the idiocy that comes with these things. I like to pretend they don’t exist. Now if I could just pretend that the federal government didn’t exist, that would be a good next step.

Those who oppose manufacturing in China are today’s Luddites. That hit me the other night while I was listening to an economics podcast. The Luddites were those in England in the 19th century who didn’t want the mechanization of the textile industry and went so far as to destroy equipment to try to “save jobs.” Those who are trying to stop international trade just don’t understand economics and don’t understand that the distributed manufacturing process that we see today is good for everybody involved.

On the same subject, those who complain about Chinese manufacturing because they say it’s terrible for the workers need to watch the ABC News report from this week about what it’s like in the Foxconn factory that makes Apple equipment. People are lined up competing for those jobs, because they’re far better jobs than they can get back in their small villages. Take a look at the conditions in the villages they’re escaping from. Would they like easier work and higher pay. Of course. (Wouldn’t we all?) The work they’re doing is making their lives better. It’s making their families’ lives better. And it’s providing those in the West with products for lower prices than we’d otherwise pay. It’s a win for everyone.

If you’re interested in how American companies can successfully compete against Chinese manufacturing, there’s a fascinating discussion of that on this week’s EconTalk podcast. Adam Davidson of NPR’s Planet Money talks about his recent reporting about what makes some U.S. manufacturers successful. I learned a lot from the interview, and I highly recommend it.

Did you happen to notice that the National Enquirer has what it claims is a picture of Whitney Houston in her casket? That sparked a bit of discussion on my Facebook page Wednesday about the propriety of it. At least one person saw it as disrespectful, but someone else objected to the “inherent gnosticism” of being upset about such displays.

I neither object to it nor promote it. I just find it funny. I’m amused that there’s this weird fascination with celebrities that creates a market for it and I’m amused that the tabloids cater to that in ways that make it seem like important news. All around, it’s just self-satirizing.

One of our regulars around here got some very good news on Wednesday. He’s recently returned to full-time ministry and got official word from his denomination that he’s been reinstated to the roster of active, full-time ordained ministers. This is great news for him and for the church he’s recently started serving. We’re proud of you, JB. Keep up the good work.

Share on Social Networks

I haven’t posted anything new in my YouTube series about narcissism in the last couple of weeks, so some people have been asking about it. There’s nothing wrong and I’ll be back soon. The issue is simply a technical problem because of a piece of equipment that died. Here’s a brief video I posted on YouTube to explain.

On a live awards show Sunday night, one man made a joke about a female celebrity. The husband of the celebrity was offended and hit the man who made the joke. Or maybe it was staged for entertainment. Who knows? Who cares? Social media is full of discussion — and even arguments — about this idiocy today. This baffles me. Let’s assume for a moment that the event happened as reported. People have been having such idiotic fights ever since there have been humans. Half the bars in the world see such brief dustups regularly. It simply doesn’t matter. The fact that so many people believe they need to talk about this — or even need to have opinions about it — is more evidence of the bizarre media brainwashing that convinces many to care passionately about brain-dead trivia. Your life will be happier and saner if you focus on yourself, your family and your friends, not on whatever scripted (or spontaneous) bilge that the media wants to pipe into your home.

I’m in the middle of migrating this website to new servers this week. This means you might encounter some unexpected behavior until I get all the bugs worked out. Clicking on my links (including this one) might cause your browser to give you the message that it’s a site without a current security certificate. It’s not actually unsafe, but there’s something which isn’t yet set up for the security certificate. I apologize for any such errors you might encounter while the process is going on. If you notice any problems with content which didn’t migrate properly, I would appreciate you letting me know the details at davidmcelroy@mac.com. Thanks for your patience.

I often wonder what animals think when they look at us and consider the society we’ve created. Yes, I know this is fanciful and unrealistic, but what if they could? Would they be astounded at how we treat each other? Would they be disgusted by the ugliness and pettiness which fill so many of our daily interactions? The truth is that I’m feeling pretty disgusted with humanity tonight. I made the mistake of reading some online interactions that I should have avoided — and it sickened me. The people involved appeared to be vile and stupid and arrogant. I wish I could pretend they’re a tiny minority, but I know better. It’s times such as this when I most need to escape much of “civilization” and disconnect from their world. If humans are going to be worthy of “ruling this planet,” we have a lot of growth to do. And I fear that growth is nowhere in sight. So my buddy Thomas, above, and all of his friends would be right to judge us harshly — and to think, “Why do you folks get to be in charge?”

I should have expected this, but I honestly didn’t. The article I wrote last week about disagreements over treatment for autistic children brought me angry emails. You could almost call it “hate mail.” Of the five emails about it so far, two have been to tell me that I’m wrong to even listen to critics of the most popular therapy for autistic children — and the other three tell me I’m wrong for not condemning the treatment as the “obvious” abuse it is. If you read the article, you know I didn’t take a position on the issue, because I simply don’t know enough to have an opinion. But by talking about the issue, I stepped into a heated controversy. The emails from the two sides convinced me of nothing. But they did give me even more empathy for the unfortunate parents who have to figure out for themselves where the truth lies for their children.

Related Posts