Page 144 - Myths for the Masses An Essay on Mass Communication

Mass Communication and the Meaning of Self in Society

importantly, reduces the construction of the event to a television
happening by relying on the standard language of television pro-
duction. In addition, the horrific imagery becomes just too good
not to be used over and over again in a cycle of violence that numbs
rather than enlightens the viewer. Thus, while taking advantage of
what television does best – being at the scene – coverage of 9/11
also overreached its potential when it wanted to be what it could
not be: a pair of searching eyes of a thinking and feeling individual
on the ground at a catastrophic event. The incident also revealed
that television pictures are not worth a thousand words, and sug-
gested that journalistic products remain fragmented performance
pieces which leave no time for reflection about a television reality
which is but a simulation of being at the scene.
Because looking involves the human capacity for emotion, the
experience of being in a place or with people makes the encounter
with “news” a different adventure.Thus, there were many references
to the cinematic quality of the unfolding tragedy. Comments from
viewers – “it was like in the movies” or “this was like television” –
only confirmed that individuals live with and react to the defining
authority of mass communication and its impact on how they expe-
rience the world. Consequently, if it is television, it may be easier
to bear, since it is not real, but if it is real, it is still television.
Since mass communication operates within a technological and
ideological frame, fragmentation rules the process of mediation; that
is, reality is always produced within the size of a television screen,
a newspaper column, or a broadcast minute as well as within the
boundaries of professional standards and political ambitions.The raw
and unedited personal experience of 9/11, however, stayed outside
these customary media frames, overlapping perhaps in its sequenc-
ing of events; but it was larger, more comprehensive, felt more
deeply, and, above all, it was visceral. Being there was a deeply per-
sonal experience, in which the camera was replaced by looking,
which called upon all of the senses for an emotional response; it
was also a shared experience among strangers, when passive media
audiences, released into their own reality, turned into responsive and
caring individuals.
When people became aware of the limitations of mass commu-
nication, it was a realization that turned into a moment of libera-

132