Wednesday, January 23, 2008

news

I think everyone's heard about Heath Ledger's death.

Now they're backtracking a little from what was initially said - the news reports, early on (at least on FOX, which I was watching at the time) were "OMG he was surrounded by PILLS and butt naked face down on his bed!!!!111!!!!"

And so, of course, the brain goes to a particular place, hearing that.

Or maybe my brain does, having had a relative who committed suicide. (And yeah, I'm pretty much intellectually over it, but I won't get emotionally over it - at least not with OMG WTF HE KILLED HIMSELF news stories coming out from time to time)

And now, they're backpedaling. And you know what? I'm kind of angry. Why report all the lurid crap? Why give us the "surrounded by PILLS" as the last mental image of this guy. Even if it's not true, it's still hard to shake.

Why not just wait, dammit. Why not say, "We believe he's been found dead. Foul play is not suspected." and leave it at that until you know for freaking sure.

(because this morning, the suggesting is that it was either accidental, or he was already ill with pneumonia - and maybe had a fatal reaction to a dosage that wouldn't have affected a healthy person. Or, hell, maybe pills have nothing to do with it - pneumonia can and does kill even young and otherwise healthy people sometimes)

I think this is, for me, the ugliest side of the 24-hour news cycle - the need to whip things up to some crazy messy froth. Like overbeating egg whites. And then, it just collapses later, but there's still the big mess, the slop, the salmonella. (Yes, I am good at stretching a metaphor nearly to the breaking point).

It's the whole "it bleeds, it leads" phenomenon.

And I find myself wondering: what about his family? What about his 2 year old kid? Two years old is enough to wonder "where did Daddy go" but not old enough to understand ANYTHING about Daddy's death other than a sense of abandonment. What about his friends?

If I had a friend who died in a sudden and unpleasant way, it would be very painful to see it promoted over and over again on the news as some kind of fodder for the sensation-seekers.

And why is it this way with younger stars? Is there some kind of sick fascination with the death of the young and famous, whether it's through an unavoidable accident, or a serious illness, or drugs, or misfortune, or their own hands? Many of the older famous folks who pass on get a brief mention, a nod, and then they're down the memory hole of the news, and only people like the film-bloggers or the music-bloggers actually eulogize them.

3 comments:

the dame said...

I had a friend die in a way that drew media attention. And, yeah, it's pretty painful to turn on the news and see someone you care about there. To see inaccurate information shared with millions of strangers. It's difficult.

I also found myself perusing blogs (because I'm an idiot) and so many people who did not know her had opinions and some of them included lurid speculation about someone who wasn't a person to them. Needless to say, I stopped. It was a foolish mistake and just served to upset me further. I love the internet and hate it sometimes, too.

It is so sad about Mr. Ledger. I am hoping that the public focuses on mourning the loss of an actor whose future work we will be deprived of - because his work is the part of him that we have any claim to - and leaves the speculation to the police and his personal life to his friends and family. I know that won't happen. But one can still hope.

Anonymous said...

I knew I was getting old when it seemed to me that the media gave only passing mention to the death of Suzanne Pleshette, which I thought was a pretty big deal, and then yesterday I was saying, "Who the hell is Heath Ledger?" And to think I used to be on the younger side of the Generation Gap.

Cullen said...

Benazir who?

Not to cheapen Ledger's life any, but the media sucks.