Sickening News
A heavy thought for a Friday heading into a long weekend.
There are certain things about being in the news business that I find distasteful. I don’t enjoy it when I have to tell people that a 5 year old’s grandparents let him starve to death. When little Jeffrey Baldwin’s family members rally outside the courthouse before the killer grandparents’ sentencing hearing, I can’t help but wonder, where WERE you when he was starving? That kind of neglect doesn’t take its toll overnight. This is the kind of story that makes me wish I was doing something light and fun – just for the moment – instead of talking about it. That’s not to say my personal distaste for the subject matter ever gets in the way of my decision to cover the story – ever. They’re two separate things. The newscaster in me knows the value and importance of a story but the sensitive creature inside me withers at the thought of covering it.
Still, I think that some of my fellow newscasters, specifically many at the very beginning and very end of their careers, have lost or do not yet have the ability to be as sensitive to stories like the Baldwin case. 680 News is in the business of “hooks”, as are many other stations with a news focus. We do a lot of teasing of stories that are “still to come” and it’s in those moments that the art of what we’re trying to accomplish can be lost. There is no need, in my opinion, to trot out the gruesomest details of Jeffrey’s death as a “tease” to get people to continue to listen. Not only might it do the exact opposite, and make them tune out, we risk sounding wholly insensitive. These are people’s lives and deaths and anyone with a heart has been moved by Jeffrey’s sad story.
We need to tell people the news, but to never forget that our listeners are not as knee deep in the stomach turning details of it as we are. I’m not suggesting that we hide the truth, rather that we properly place it. Is it necessary to explain how terribly abused Jeffrey was, and his pathetic weight at the time of death? At some point, yes. It illustrates why his grandparents were convicted of killing him. Is it necessary to trot out those same details every single time the story is alluded to? No, it’s not. For one thing, overuse of such details can lessen their impact. And we certainly don’t want to appear as if we are riding on the back of a murdered little boy to further our own cause – higher ratings.
