The Manchester Evening News (or it might have been the Metro, I wasn't paying a whole lot of attention really) had a headline Drama as Cameron vetoes change to European treaty. Irrelevant of the content of the story (which repels me at the thought of distancing ourselves from Europe, but doesn't anger me due to my complete lack of knowledge on the workings of international economics) I was deeply annoyed with this headline. In fact I was unable to get past the headline, partly because I was reading it over the shoulder of someone on the bus, but mainly because it is indicative of the switch in news reporting from a focus on actual news to a focus on trivial details, sensationalism and human emotion.
The headline should have been Cameron vetoes change to European treaty: that, and that alone, is the actual news story. What purpose does the Drama as serve? Why the unnecessarily sensationalistic preamble? Grr, I hate it. Where is this drama: I suppose it exists in the mind of the cretinous hack sub-editor who spawned that piece of shit headline, but where is it in the real world, and even if it is there somewhere, who the fuck cares? Right, that little bit of anger is out of my system, so let me see if I can actually think straight about the issue.
I view this, perhaps, as being indicative (as I may have already mentioned) of a major dumbing down in news reporting. The boring facts of what actually happened are of no concern, as the news outlets weep in fear of the public switching the channel or leaving their free newspaper untaken from the vendor's hand or the bus's seat. How could we, the dipshit dribbling public, possibly be interested in a news story that isn't entirely focused on human emotion? The irrational over-reactions of clamouring sweaty humanity is all that matters. Fuck what happened. How did people feel after whatever it was that did or didn't happen? That's all that matters.
This is the reason that all science reporting in the mainstream press, from The Sun to the Observer to the BBC, is worthless nonsensical gibberish. We are spared those tedious facts in favour of the knee-jerk reactions of biased and ill-informed bystanders. Political news is similarly reduced. Surely a basic and honest understand of the workings of science and politics is the most important thing a human can have in a world where it is occasionally extremely important to make huge decisions about, for example, medical care or voting. How can we be expected to make these decisions, or even understand their meaning and value, when all the information we are served is washed away under a stream of opinion and emotion? These should be almost entirely (if not entirely entirely) unemotional and factual subjects for which to make decisions on.
But people like Drama don't they? And who really likes vetoing, Europe, or treaties? No one. Hollyoaks is, I think, a drama, isn't it? How many people watch that? And how many people watch The European Treaty Veto Show? No one. Not even me. Stupid world.