THE FIRSTS — how media is spicing things up


this is a short post since it has been a while since another one. I was reading in the news recently and i found that obama’s first interview as a president was with aljazeera. now forgetting about this piece of news , in general the media over uses the word “first” way too much. many times i was confused with it. after gaza war, there was first attack after the ceasefire, then another first respond, then another first closing crossings. and this goes one on everything. first big crisis, worst crisis. it really gives you a subconscious thought that this even is very important, while most of the time it has happened before many times.

some methods to do that without being a liar, you always add a small sentence afterwards, this is the worst improvement in the econmoy in the last 5 years. or the most brutal attack since the attack on gaza. now to think about it, this is a very short time and it is not weird that it is true, it just sound interesting. i think it will reach to a point where they will say something “this is the first one to do something since the last one did it “i can easily see some similar derivative of this, probably if someone swam a river, they probably will use something like that.

impact of this is not always big, but in the interview news for example, many commentors were really pissed that the FIRST interview was with an arabic channel, i do recall while following obama’s news, they always metnioned first for every step he takes, first interview since planning to run, first blah since offically run, first blah since he took this state, first blah sine he is the democratic nominee, first blah since the speak he did, … etc you get where i am going. it gives importance to events more than they deserve which can , as shown from the comments, to give wrong impression to readers.

just felt like sharing this idea

Posted in Uncategorized

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *