From Jim Metrock:
Channel One News is a TV show that children HAVE to watch in many schools. Children as young as TEN are in the captive audience. Many of these young students have parents who try to protect them from some of the more brutal scenes in daily newscasts. But it is very difficult for parents to protect their children from the stupid, insensitive decisions made by the people who run Channel One News.
Each school day morning kids are often FORCED to watch WHATEVER Channel One wants to show them. And it is frightening what this company considers appropriate to show middle school students.
With all the stories Channel One could have covered on January 2, 2008, its first day back from a 12-day holiday break, Channel One decides to do a story on the tiger that killed a man and maimed several others at the San Francisco Zoo. What were they thinking?
Many young people, even in the middle school age, like zoos. Children of all ages love animals.
Why then pick this story out of all the other things happening in the world to show students? One can easily imagine the way this story is done, that a certain number of young people will not ever want to go back to a zoo.
It is not a surprise to me that Channel One picked a story that had a taste of horror to it. Channel One has always liked the violent story for the same reason real TV networks prefer the violent story over the feel-good story – it draws attention, it draws eyeballs. If you don’t have the viewer’s attention, the advertiser can’t sell his product and the advertiser won’t pay as much for the next commercial they run. Violent images on Channel One News = dollars for Channel One executives. Some examples: WB Angel, Gun Accident PSA, Hanging Saddam , All Horror Day , September 11 images set to music, Ax murderer "joke" (video), "They shot the boy in the head", Channel One: Your Dead Body Channel.
Channel One’s producers go overboard on this story. They entitle it "TIGER ATTACK" (we are surprised they left off the "!!!"). This story is going to get the tabloid treatment. Channel One’s producer sets aside the fact that children are the audience for this story. The producer wants to MAXIMIZE the horror of this tragedy. Could they have used "Zoo Accident" for the title? Yes, but they chose the word "attack" deliberately. All media are a construction. Words and images are chosen or discarded in order to arrive at an intended purpose. That is a short lesson in media literacy.
Channel One’s producer and editor had the luxury of having time to pick exactly what images and words they wanted children to see and hear. The incident happened on Christmas Day, so Channel One’s employees had over a week to think about how the story would be presented in classrooms.
The first image children see as the report begins is this:
:
A badly injured person is shown being strapped onto a stretcher. The eerie green tint to the scene helps to create a sense of horror.
This scene of the injured man dissolves and Channel One brings up its tabloid-like title: TIGER ATTACK.
What are the children seeing now?
What is THAT?
We see the headlights of a car or truck, but there is something on the ground.
Is that a body?
Good grief, Channel One is presenting to its millions of captive viewers a picture of the dead man killed by the tiger. Thankfully the body has been covered up by the authorities. Why would Kent Haehl, Channel One’s brand-spanking new CEO and Kristy Schantz, the executive producer, do this to kids?
In the report students see images of crying people.
The story would be rough enough as is, but Channel One adds another image of violence for good measure. They mention the same tiger had attacked a zoo worker the year before.
No they wouldn’t – would they? Yes, they would. They searched and found a video clip of the injured person FROM A YEAR AGO to add to this story. Here it is:
Children clearly see a woman being rushed from the zoo after being mauled by the tiger. This video clip is from 2006. Again, if, IF, students have to be made aware of ALL zoo accidents and killings, then the fact that this same tiger had hurt somebody before would be relevant and one can argue should be in this report. But why do the students needs to SEE the last year’s victim?
This is gratuitous. This is mean, moronic "journalism" as practice to an art form by Channel One News.
What a way for kids to start their school day! Here is one more reason why schools are calling Channel One News and telling them to, "Come and pick up you TV sets. We don’t want to try to defend your TV show anymore."
[As of today, January 4, Channel One has disabled the showing of the January 2 program on its web site. Obligation has taped this story off the Internet so you can watch it below.]
| From Channel One’s transcript for January 2, 2008 |
|---|
|
CHANNEL ONE ANNOUNCER: ON CHRISTMAS DAY, A TIGER AT THE SAN FRANCISCO ZOO ESCAPED FROM HER PEN AND MAULED THREE PEOPLE.
ANNOUNCER: THE ATTACK INJURED TWO BROTHERS AND LEFT A 17 YEAR OLD DEAD. ANNOUNCER: THE INCIDENT HAS RAISED QUESTIONS ABOUT THE ZOO’S SAFETY. ANNOUNCER: THE WALL AROUND THE TIGER EXHIBIT STANDS AT 12 AND A HALF FEET WHICH IS FOUR FEET LESS THAN THE RECOMMENDED HEIGHT. ANNOUNCER: THE SAME TIGER ATTACKED A ZOOKEEPER DURING A FEEDING A YEAR ANNOUNCER: ZOO OFFICIALS NOW SAY THEY HAVE PLANS TO INSTALL ADDITIONAL |
See for yourself: Channel One News TIGER ATTACK as shown on its middle school broadcasts. [poor video quality because our camera is filming the webcast at channelone.com.]
