First, a little background.
Count Dracula, the title character in the 1897 novel and all the horror movies about vampires, is based on a historical figure named Vlad Tsepes Drakul (1431–1476), sometimes known in English as "Vlad the Impaler" for what he did to an estimated 40,000 to 100,000 of his enemies. Nice guy.
I assume we don't need any background on Lindsay Lohan and Sarah Palin. Lohan is due in court Friday, likely about the same time we're in class, and Palin's always in the news.
Now, back to the question.
The answer will begin to ome clear as we read "Newspapers: A Brief History" by the World Association of Newspapers headquartered in Paris. It gives a little of the history of newspapers, and it's important because it tells us something about the role that newspapers have traditionally served in the Western world ... going back to the days of the Roman Empire. We'll also look at the circulation figures of the World’s Top 100 Dailies. And we'll get a sense of history on the fly from "What They Say: Quotes About Newspapers. I'll point out a couple or three that I like. But I want you to read them and see which ones you agree with, disagree with ... or just sort of leave you "meh," or indifferent. What's different today? What's the same?
Worth a thousand words. "A Graphic History of Newspaper Circulation Over the Last Two Decades". One word for it. Down. Forget the other 999. Down, down, down.
One response to declining readership has been to try to compete with television and celebrity magazines. John Dvorak of PC Magazine has a blog post titled " Newspaper Publishers Are Idiots" in which he explains his opinion of this trend. (At least he's not coy - he lets you know what he's thinking.)
I was doing research at the University of California Newspaper Library, which has a tremendous collection of microfilmed old newspapers from every era. If you want to see the heyday of the newspaper business and quickly see what would work today, look at a 1954 edition of The San Francisco Examiner. It's so dense with news stories that today's papers look as if there's nothing in them. It is extremely compelling.Some papers have tried to not go over the cliff. The Washington Post, The New York Times and, to some extent, quality Midwestern papers like The Chicago Tribune and The St. Louis Post-Dispatch, still publish mostly news and analysis of public affairs and economic news. But they all publish more fluff than they used to, cetainly more than the old Examiner would have ever thought of. And they're all getting more like TV and, more recently, celebrity websites like TMZ.com.
The point is that there are good ideas already out there, and they just need to be rediscovered. But for now the panic-stricken bosses seem to be heading down the same abyss in the same direction. It's the direction that created the abyss in the first place.
Which brings us to Lindsay Lohan. Fox News has an interactive feature where we can vote on this vital question of the day: Is Lindsay Lohan the Worst Celebrity Repeat Offender? Other choices: Paris Hilton, none of the above, undecided.
And this news flash - fluff flash? oh, let's not go there - from Us Weekly: "Lohan drank, 'giggled' as she tweeted confession" ...
In the meantime, the news media are treating politics and government like celebrity news. Here's columnist Alyiah Shahid of The New York Daily News detailing how "Sarah Palin and Christine O'Donnell: Tea Party's conservative darlings look, dress and talk alike ... what happens when we cover politics and government like celebrity gossip?
Well, here's one thing that happens. The politicians start acting like celebrities. Jay Newton-Small of Time magazine has an interesting analysis of how Palin does it and uses her status as a celebrity to gain political traction.
Which is interesting ... and important ... but leads us away from our original question: What similarity can you find in the news coverage of Dracula* and Lindsay Lohan? But, oh heck, maybe it doesn't - how is Vlad the Impaler's coverage like that of Sarah Palin and Christine O'Donnell, too?
13 comments:
The world would be in trouble if any of the three were president. :)
Actually one thing the three have in common is that they are all well known people or figures in the United States for the most part. Their reputations are based off what we have learned through media, books, etc.
I think the thing they all have in common is that their all pretty much well-known from the news coverage and through whatever the mass media has to say about them.
I totally agree with Kris10 - we don't want any of them for a president :)
But also, they all have been created into character personalities by the media, with specific reputations.
They are all well known figuires due to there experiences in life. The world today tends to focus on what catches our attention. They do this by talking about Sarah Palin's clothes, Lindsay Lohan's drugs, and Count Dracula's ways to kill. So these figures are the same in the way they are protrayed by the current media outlet taking them on.
All three of these have been in news coverage for many different reasons.They all are wellknown for something, and because of what newspapers, magazines, and television have said they are more known.
All three are celebrities due to media coverage and the publicity created over their bad actions.
I liked your comments ... especially Kris10's thought of having Dracula as president!
:)
Also what kdowis said, "... they all have been created into character personalities by the media, with specific reputations." And RSeaver, "All three are celebrities due to media coverage and the publicity created over their bad actions."
I think coverage of all three has been hyped. And it's been going on a long time.
That history of newspapers on the World Association of Newspapers' website says, "Manuscript newssheets were being circulated in German cities by the late 15th century. These pamphlets were often highly sensationalized; one reported on the abuse that Germans in Transylvania were suffering at the hands of Vlad TsepesDrakul, also known as Count Dracula."
These 3 have been covered by the media due to their bad actions. What they have in common is they are all well known figures.
All three of these people have a reputation, some are worse than others. But thwy are all seen in the public eye trhough mass media.
They are all popular in some way and are known around the world. They get popular though by doing bad things and they're still getting famous for that. I think people like this aren't doing anything to stay famous at the time, so they feel like they have to keep their repuation up. Newspapers, magazines, internet and television is where we see all of this information at.
All three of them have been made even more famous due to the media. Much of the attention I think has been exaggerated and I think the media has made them who they are.
dracula everybody knows who he is they are always trying to recreate him in numerous movies, also sarah palin everybody knows here because of old man mccain I think if he would never picked her to run with she wouldnt be known lindsy lohan is all about the media because recently she hasnt been doing anything as movies to stay popular so she acts a fool she she can publicity because who wouldnt read about cracked out celeberity teen I know I would
All three are "popular" because of their coverage by media. The drama in their lives have brought the media flocking to them.
Post a Comment