ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

How real is too real?

Some of us remember how movie goers used to marvel at the weekly news reels shown in most every theater in the country before the feature film got under way. It was about the closest thing to "breaking news" anyone experienced in those pre-televi...

Some of us remember how movie goers used to marvel at the weekly news reels shown in most every theater in the country before the feature film got under way. It was about the closest thing to "breaking news" anyone experienced in those pre-television days, when film footage was shown of overseas skirmishes, politics, sports, and whatever else was happening around the world. Along with radio, the movie news reels were one of the primary sources of the news of the day.

Television and eventually the Internet have changed all that, however, and viewers can now watch the news as it happens in "real time."

Through the innovations of "den cam" technology, for example, hundreds of thousands of viewers worldwide looked on as a North American black bear in a remote den in Ely has given birth to cubs for the past two winters.

Numerous crimes have been captured virtually as they happen, through the technology of modern video surveillance as well as by the "dash cams" mounted in the squad cars of law enforcement officials. The video clip taken as Moose Lake convenience store clerk Katie Poirier was abducted was shown publicly over and over again as officials sought clues to her abductor. A couple of weeks ago, a jury in the Carlton County Courthouse looked on as the video from a police officer's "dash cam" revealed accused arsonist Eriberto Smith as he was hauled screaming out of his girlfriend's burning house.

Video clips of news events and other current happenings are being posted on the air and over news websites almost as they happen, with the public looking on as eyewitnesses.

ADVERTISEMENT

With all of today's technological advances in recording and sharing the news of the day, however, should come a certain amount of integrity and responsibility in what is shared with the public on a "need to know" basis. Entertainment reality shows notwithstanding, how much "real life" should and needs to be shared?

The recent obsession with celebrity Charlie Sheen is a perfect case in point. The national news media seems bent on documenting the actor's sad fall from grace, and you can tune in on almost any given morning of the week and hear interviews of Sheen's rantings and ravings - some of them live, some of them with his two girlfriends in tow and some in the presence of his 2-year-old twins.

Some would argue it makes for good viewing, or that there is some socially redeeming quality to watching how the ravages of mental illness and/or drug and alcohol abuse affect a person, but the obsession with showing a man's life falling apart at the seams is an unhealthy one. Sadder yet, Sheen seems to be flourishing in the negative limelight and has played into the hands of virtually any or all comers who want to give him a little air time. He's even started his own reality show.

Legitimate news sources are following a slippery slope when they buy in to such "real time" programming as news. If it's a case of covering something "just because we can," we need to sit back and take a long, hard look at our own role as news providers.

Wendy Johnson

What To Read Next
Get Local

ADVERTISEMENT