imagine if your job was to report the news...
but imagine if you had a secondary job, which was to:
"report the kind of news that people will tune-in to."
imagine if your secondary job rewarded you more, and
imagine if the secondary job paid you more, and
imagine if (even if nobody said so) your secondary job was (really) your primary job.
think of times when you've told a story:
- didn't you leave out the 'boring' parts?
- didn't you 'not' report the insignificant things, like your heart rate, respiration rate, and hair color?
- didn't you zero-in on the most dramatic, the most fun, and the most entertaining parts of the story?
- the gently-moved (but still usable) napkin? ...or
- the completely dilapidated, destroyed, rubbled (former) mansion?
is it your fault (that you embellished the fun stuff)?
is it the newscaster's fault (that he zeroes-in on the horror)?
if the newscaster's very job (1/3 of his/her life)... his/her paycheck, his/her status, his/her future... depends upon 'tune-in' (as opposed to reality)...
can we not predict the over-dramatization, sensationalism, and (at times) the very creation of 'news'?
- imagine if the news was imaginary.
- imagine if history was his-story.
- imagine if everything in every book and every report and every speech and every line... was designed:
- to get your attention,
- to get you to tune in, and
- to get you to get others to tune-in...
...again and again and again.