Follow Me

by Libby Hellmann

Ok. I did it. I’m on Twitter. And I’m enjoying it.

I realize some of you are deathly tired of hearing about Twitter. I can’t blame you. If I weren’t already doing it, I’d be a curmudgeon too. But before you automatically dismiss it out of hand, give it a try. For a week or so. It took me a while to get used to it, but I happen to like the possibilities.

Frankly, aside from playing Wordscraper, I don’t really see the point of Facebook. Do I really want to connect with people back in high school? And I’m getting a little tired of being invited to “events” where I don’t know any of the people involved. I’m not on My Space, but I hear it’s mostly advertising. And while I’m on GoodFriends, I’m not that active.

I’m not saying Twitter doesn’t sink into banality at times. I’m not interested in what someone’s cooking for dinner, or how they overslept or didn’t. Happily, though, every post, because it’s limited to 140 characters, is manageable. 140 characters is about two sentences. Or a sound bite. So whether the comments are clever or dumb, they pass quickly.

Speaking of sound bites, that’s probably the main reason I joined. I’m a recovering news junkie – although I’m not exactly recovering any more. (I worked in TV news in another life). My jones kicked in during the election and it’s still with me. I need to hear breaking news, as well as updates, round-ups, and comments about the news. Twitter is terrific for that. There are a lot of “journos” as well as news organizations on the site, and most provide links to the stories, blogs, or comments they’re "tweeting" about. I’ve never been so well informed.

But I like Twitter for professional reasons as well. There are a lot of Chicago people and organizations on Twitter, which helps me feel more connected to the city I write about. There are also a lot of book people (booksellers, publishers, agents, bloggers, and authors), and they dispense solid information. There’s even a book discussion hosted by LitChat a few times a week. You’d be surprised by the depth of the conversation.

In fact, Twitter forces me to be more concise. Which isn’t a bad thing. It also helps me appreciate the wit and brevity of others.

So what’s the downside? There are spammers on Twitter – although they exist on other sites too. There are also folks who collect “followers” for reasons I don’t completely understand, although I’m sure it has something to do building mailing lists. And the sheer volume of tweets can be overwhelming – I use an application, Tweetdeck, that helps organize the flow. And, as I said, there are silly, time-wasting tweets. But for every one of those, there are also announcements from politicians, humorists, and celebrities (Jane Fonda is on Twitter). There’s even someone who tweets amusing comments about “24” and Jack Bauer. And yes, it can be a time suck, if you’re not careful.

But enough from me. What do you think? Is Twitter just another narcissistic time-waster? A fad? Crack cocaine for someone with ADD? Or do you see possibilities in the service?

Btw, you can follow me here.

Gerbil Wheels and News Junkies

by Libby Hellmann

They’ve finally done it. The news media have broadcast themselves into irrelevancy. It’s been trending that way for years, but now, with the coverage of the Democratic convention, it’s over the top. I’m a long-time news junkie, but even I’ve had to turn off the tube.

On one hand, you’d think continuous coverage of the proceedings by CNN, MSNBC and Fox News would be a good thing. After all, the networks have abandoned full coverage, save for a spotty hour here and there. If the 24-7 outlets were really giving us full coverage, it would be a tremendous public service, not to mention a rich historical archive. But they’re not. Except for major speeches, what's on the air is a sea of pundits, all armed with talking points from their respective political arms.

Some of them don’t even bother to deny it. After Hillary addressed the convention last night, several “analysts” mentioned the emails they’d already received (Blackberries and I-phones are de rigeur now) reacting to her speech. And while I was flipping between CNN and Fox, I heard conservative pundits on each say exactly the same thing. In the same words. This is not news. It’s propaganda.

But that’s only one of the problems. There has to be something going on, if only to fill all those hours, so what’s evolved is a false sense of urgency. For example, we’re treated to a breathless breaking news proclamation that the plane carrying a VIP has landed safely… or an “inside scoop” that Madonna’s new tour marries pictures of McCain to Adolph Hitler. The desperate need to create conflict elevates triviality, gossip and speculation to truth: Are Hillary PUMAs going to revolt? How frosty are relations between the two camps? Are the Clintons “over”?

Again, this is not news. It’s not even debate. It’s manufactured content. Ersatz news. Comedian Jon Stewart, whom some consider the most trustworthy source of news these days (an irony in and of itself) took the media to task the other day, calling the 24 cable news outlets “gerbil wheels” of spin. And this wasn’t the first time. Four years ago, he pleaded a similar case with Crossfire hosts Tucker Carlson and Paul Begala. Sadly, most of the audience thought it was a comedy routine.

One of Stewart’s points was that by abdicating their responsibility for objective reporting, the cable outlets help advance the strategies and plans of politicians and corporations, who, in many cases, own the broadcast news outlet. I can’t disagree. Too often what passes for political discourse is raw partisanship, especially on MSNBC and Fox. And, in the off chance that a talking head disagrees with the political orientation of Chris Matthews or Bill O’Reilly,or their bosses, they’re literally shouted down or simply cut off.

A long time ago I worked at an underground newspaper. We were a collective, very Marxist, as convinced of our own superiority as Fox News and MSNBC are of theirs. One of my comrades claimed that even back then, the media were the pawns of the ruling class. They only reported news that the establishment could handle. You couldn’t trust them for accurate information, he said. Particularly news that undercut the ruling class's goals and strategies. The only thing you could count on, he said, was the weather report.

I didn’t want accept that, and I went on to work for the media. Inspired by Edward R. Murrow and Fred Friendly, I thought I was performing a public service. And when Watergate broke a few years later, I was convinced that serious journalism would --and did -- safeguard our democracy. But I now believe resentment over Watergate triggered Bill Clinton’s impeachment twenty years later. In the meantime Rupert Murdoch bought Fox News, MSNBC became the left-wing alternative, and CNN is up for grabs.

The weather channel says it’s not going to rain for another week. What do you think?