“Boeing 777 will struggle to maintain altitude when fuel tanks are empty” ran a CNN headline on March 31, 2014. Across America, millions of eyes were glued to the television set.
“This is the most outstanding and life-changing story that I’ve ever had the privilege of watching,” said no one.
“What trailblazing, groundbreaking journalism!” said no expert.
Everywhere, the same thought was not going through viewers’ minds: “This is going to revolutionize the search for MH370. It’s going to change aeronautics forever–maybe even the world.”
Why did a supposedly respectable news network think that basic common sense is worth reporting? This news item epitomized the depths to which networks such as CNN and FOX have sunk when covering the missing Malaysian Airlines MH370 flight. With no real new factual information to report, CNN and FOX have scraped the bottom of the barrel to keep up the nonstop coverage that boosts their ratings. In the process they have thrown media responsibility and integrity to the wind.
The Facts
On March 8, Kuala Lumpur air traffic control reported that it had lost contact with Malaysian Airlines flight MH370 as it was flying over the Gulf of Thailand to Beijing. This prompted a massive international search and rescue operation that has now lasted a month and still garnered no conclusive evidence about the fate of the plane and the 239 people aboard it. Satellite images of debris found in the southern Indian Ocean off the coast of Perth have generated hope of resolving the mystery, but to date none of these fragments have been positively identified as airplane wreckage. Finally, on March 24, Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak announced that Flight 370 was assumed lost with no survivors.
Media Reaction
The disappearance of a commercial Boeing 777 is certainly an incident worthy of significant news coverage. Yet the mainstream American media—CNN and FOX in particular—covered this incident on an almost 24/7 basis, analyzing every possible detail of the case, both real and fictional.
CNN, for example, trotted out several fantastical theories on why and how the plane had disappeared. Reporters and hosts conjectured that the plane had been weaponized and flown to Israel, struck by a meteorite, swallowed by a black hole, hijacked by terrorists, and downed by its pilot. They even speculated about the supernatural, with Don Lemon making the truly insightful observation that “something odd” may have happened to it. Lemon also pulled out a toy airplane to explain these theories, while correspondent Martin Savidge sat in a flight simulator cockpit outside Toronto for most of the month. Chad Myers even “did the math” to calculate exactly how many years it would take to map the entire ocean floor—2955, if anyone was curious. Even when CNN talked about a legitimate, probable explanation like that of smoke or fumes decommissioning everyone on board, they titled this theory “the Zombie Plane” for dramatic effect.
To bolster this wild speculation, CNN brought in “experts” to comment and analyze these claims. Anyone with the most remote connection to aeronautics seemed to become a revered guest on the show, security analysts from all over the world pitched in, and the network brought in environmentalists to talk about rubbish in the ocean. They even called up Bill Nye, the Science Guy. Since most of these so-called experts were completely unconnected to the actual investigation, they did not give viewers any new information, and instead relied more on “gut feelings” and other fallacies to explain the disappearance through conjecture.
CNN was not alone in its foray into fiction. FOX News brought in retired Lt. Gen. Thomas McInerney as one of their purported experts, and he graciously spent his time expounding on why the plane was currently being outfitted with bombs in Pakistan. He claimed that there was “direct evidence” that the plane flew under the shadow of another plane over India, and that it was probably being stocked with weapons of mass destruction with which it would attack American forces. Geraldo Rivera suggested it had been hijacked and landed to retrieve a “secret passenger,” and Bill Hemmer followed up by comparing the incident to the search for Noah’s Ark. Peter King, for his part, claimed that the pilots probably crashed the plane as part of a life insurance scam—incidentally, the plot of a Doctor Who episode.
The Battle for Ratings
The question of why these networks had this over-the-top, wall-to-wall coverage does have a relatively simple answer: ratings, ratings, ratings. FOX News consistently leads ratings, so their incentive is to stay on top. CNN, on the other hand, has been fighting a losing battle with decreasing ratings for many years, and they seemed to embrace the mystery of this incident as a means by which to boost their ratings—a strategy that worked. Compared to March 2013, CNN had a 43 percent increase in total viewers during March 2014, with the largest year-over-year growth of any cable news network. “The Lead with Jake Tapper”, “The Situation Room with Wolf Blitzer”, and “Anderson Cooper 360” all jumped to the number two spot in the ratings for their respective time slots, bypassing their MSNBC counterparts.
Economically, it all makes sense. People love a good mystery, and this missing plane remains a seemingly unsolvable one. Viewers were drawn to the inexplicable nature of the case, as well as the lingering presence of tragedy. Their imaginations were pricked by the possibilities that the disappearance suggested, so cable news companies catered to their desires—and cashed in on their own. As CNN Worldwide President Jeff Zucker told Capital New York in December, “The goal for the next six months is that we need more shows and less newscasts.” The MH370 coverage was proof that his game plan for ratings worked.
Media Values
However profitable it may be, cable news networks should care as much about their integrity as the rest of the press when making choices about how to cover big events. If they do not have new information to report, they should not spend their time speculating wildly and creating innumerable fictional scenarios which they then paint as potential truths. If they cannot obtain interviews with actual experts who can contribute towards informing the public, they should not drag in amateur pundits to fill up time. The press should be responsible about what they report and how they report it, because the consequences of irresponsible media broadcasting are far-reaching.
The propagation of these theories is fundamentally disrespectful to the families of the passengers and the crew of the MH370. These people are waiting to hear about the fate of their loved ones, and endless theorizing with no basis in fact merely raises and dashes the fruitless hopes of parents, spouses, children and friends. The families of the pilots were undoubtedly hurt by unfounded accusations of terrorism and suicide against them. In the future, seemingly inconsequential claims made about the plane itself or potential malfunctioning could potentially impact insurance litigation, even if those claims were made offhand. The pointlessness of most of the coverage lowers the perception of the media in the wider public, and has thus rightfully drawn criticism, both serious and playful, from other media personalities, as well as the derision of the online community.
Finally, apart from decimating the quality of news broadcasts, this kind of journalism severely restricts the breadth of news offered to viewers. In the month of March 2014, there were earthquakes in California and mudslides in Washington. Osama bin Laden’s nephew was convicted in Manhattan. Protesters died in clashes with the police in Venezuela. Twenty nine people were stabbed on a train in China. Egypt sentenced 529 Muslim Brotherhood members to death. Russia annexed part of Ukraine. Did these real current events not deserve as much coverage, or were ratings really more important?
The probable deaths of 239 people is a tragedy and deserves to be given due respect. Endless speculation based on financial gain rather than facts is not the way to go about it.
Image credit: Wikipedia
