Vanessa Richmond, managing editor of The Tyee, on why pop culture pap should be considered info-gourmand fare.
Sure, there's no shortage of crucial issues right now.
And I do read "serious" stories about them every day. But I am proud to say my reading diet includes far more stories considered the journalistic equivalent of genetically modified candy corn.
I'm hardly alone. The readership numbers for pop culture stories – which I count as celebrity, social trend, TV, music and film pieces in both blogs and traditional media – are skyrocketing as readership of traditional news and newspapers decline.
It's not just democracy – readers voting with their clicks – that has convinced me of pop culture's worth. I actually think celebrity "gossip" pieces can provide a rich forum for values debates.
So I'm proud to say I know as much about the Greek drama of celebrity life as I do about the sub-prime mortgage crisis or the rising cost of oil. And I consider them to be not candy, but flavourful parts of the main course.
That's because pop culture journalism is like a blond friend who seems air-headed but gets the best marks in school, is the most fun to hang out with and the liveliest to talk to. That New York Times article by Emily Blunt (sic - It's Emily Gould - BD) had 1,212 comments posted after it by noon last Monday (before comments were closed). The most popular political op-ed column of the day had 102. That's not unusual.
And that pattern plays out in the real world. At a dinner with some friends, I mentioned a story I'd read about peak oil and the impacts on flying. "Oh yeah?" said one smart, well-read friend. Then she told us about a recent flight when the airline lost her luggage. Later, I mentioned a story I'd read that listed "hippy-crite" celebs – ones who say they're concerned about the environment but whose actions suggest otherwise. John Travolta recently said "everyone can do their bit" when it comes to global warming but travels in his 150-passenger jet, alone. Madonna headlined Al Gore's Live Earth concert in London but has $2 million invested in mining and oil exploration companies. Brad Pitt spearheads a green reconstruction project in New Orleans but flies in his private jet to and from meetings there.
The conversation about the environment, policy and personal responsibility lasted most of the evening. Even the Emily Blunt (sic) article is about the costs, benefits and limits of free speech, about censorship and privacy, about ethics in journalism. Did she go too far? What is too far? That's what people talk about. ...
Talking about patterns in pop culture is politics. It's also democratic. Pop culture is popular not because it's dumb, but because it's usually about the crucial questions of life and society, told with interesting characters and a constantly updating, suspenseful storyline.
So Richmond has read an article about environment hippy-crite celebs.
If so, then can she list a few points in favour of a carbon tax, and a few of why it might not be a good idea?
Maybe she read something on Jim Cuddy showing up in Afghanistan to play ball hockey against the troops with some ex-NHLers.
If so, then does she agree with the Senate defence and national security committee that the Canadian military should talk with the Taliban in Afghanistan?
Did she ever titter about Amy Winehouse going into rehab?
If so, then what are her opinions on the Insite safe injection site in Vancouver?
What Richmond neglects about the appeal of "celebrity" news is that one can simply react to it. Very little thinking power is required to process the news that someone having an affair with so-and-so.
Back when I was a young reporter in Fort McMurray, Alta. doing streeters, asking a reaction question -- what's your favourite flavour of ice cream; what kinds of movies do you like -- would get the job done quickly. Ask a more complex question where people had to think, and you could be there all day.
Celebrity news is undoubtedly entertaining for many -- and that's not something to be undervalued in today's saturated media world. Richmond said such news is "told with interesting characters and a constantly updating, suspenseful storyline." In that way, it's kinda like the WWE. :)
Don't get me wrong: Everyone needs the occasional intellectual donut to go with their organic oatmeal.
But to suggest, as Richmond seems to, that celebrity news tells one all they need to know about the world buttresses my contention that a steady diet of this stuff rots the mind.