Friday 27 March 2009

The media predict a riot (and send cameras)

The media on both sides of the Atlantic are warning that populist rhetoric from the Obama and Brown administrations could stoke public anger and trigger social unrest.

Get serious! People don't need to be coached to be angry about soaring unemployment and bankers' bonuses. The politicians are reflecting the nasty public mood, not creating it. Does anyone really think that the great American or British publics would be less angry about the economic crisis if politicians were acting all nonchalant? Rather the opposite, I'd have thought.

Mind you, there may be someone out there fomenting all this anger that the media are so worried about: the media themselves. There are particular concerns over the possibility of rioting in London next week, when the G20 meeting will be taking place in the city. If the media really want to help forestall any trouble, I have a suggestion for them: they should announce right now that they won't be sending any cameras or reporters to cover the demonstrations. It's the corollary of the old question, "if a tree falls in a deserted forest, does it make a sound?": if nobody films a Womble, does he bother to protest?

No comments: