I saw Frank Rich speak at the Guthrie tonight. He talked about the increasing spectacle of media and the merging of news and entertainment. As always he’s an insightful and eloquent speaker/writer. I was moved to ask a question in the Q&A at the end, however. He had concluded with a few ideas of the “what you can do” sort: Be more skeptical, and pay for good journalism. The second in particular hurt. It hurt bad. When even one of the most eloquent advocates against the ruins of capitalist political culture is left begging for money (he didn’t like my framing it that way, but that’s what it was"), we’re in trouble…
So I waited my turn at the microphone and said some approximation of:
“We as the public are facing a dilemma right now that you spoke of: Just as increasing access to the rudimentary information necessary for good journalism becomes readily available via the Internet, the news media have increased the barriers to distribution by cultivating the mediathon as you describe it. You gave two answers to that problem that I found unsatisfactory.
First you said we should follow the younger generations and become more skeptical of news stories. That’s all well and good but as anyone who teaches young college students today can tell you, such radical skepticism leads as often to apathy as any kind of political change.
And second, you basically pleaded for money. That is another problematic answer. We all paid $15-35 to even be able to see you speak. I was scanning the audience and I was only able to count 2 black people [afterward I saw a couple more, but that’s beside the point]. The barriers of money mean that not everyone is going to get a voice with that solution. Even in the Midwest this is hardly representative of the racial minorities in the population.
So what else can we do?
He got a little defensive about the idea that he was pleading for money and acknowledged that the newspaper business model might not last, but that a couple will probably survive, including the NYT. I would tend to agree with that assessment. And on the other solution he defended the idea of skepticism against apathy.
I didn’t really expect him to offer a revolutionary answer. I don’t think anyone yet has one. But I also think that these were important questions to bring up. I was satisfied simply making Frank Rich and a few hundred Minneapolis culturati feel uncomfortable about their whiteness and upper class status.
On my way back to my seat a women on the aisle said, “I liked your questions.” And on the way out after the lecture a couple of young black women smiled at me and said “hi” in way that I read as appreciation for what I had said.
And as I was getting on my bike leaving the Guthrie a couple of middle-aged white women walked passed (not noticing me) saying how much they “prefer [inaudible] because you don’t have audience members looking for their five minutes of fame.”
What ever happened to 15? I want my ten more minutes!
