Breaking News

It’s hard to turn on any newscast today without seeing or hearing the phrase “Breaking News”. An attention getter, for sure, but is it being used too loosely? First of all, the only news that is truly breaking is that which is occurring right now and will not last an inordinate amount of time. An earthquake, for instance. Or the vote on medical reform (so long as the vote is imminent, taking place, or just completed). It won’t be “breaking” come tomorrow or the next day or the next. Maybe a “top story”, but that’s all it warrants by then. My other thought concerns the almost routine usage of this phrase. What with 24/7 news channels, isn’t some kind of news breaking by the second? Of course there is, but is it newsworthy?

I’m afraid that, in an attempt to keep pace with the more spontaneous internet updates available, the more traditional news gatherers are inserting hype where it needn’t appear. Not too long ago, newspapers and wire services allowed their content to be placed on the web free of charge. Their cash flows were healthy and they saw nothing wrong in cultivating a new frontier (the internet) for future users. Well, the cash flow has dried up and now many of us turn to the “free” format on line to get our daily dose of information. Rumors persist that the free ride is coming to an end, though, and I’d say that it might well be a good thing. The internet provides ready access to news, but should it be provided gratis to the detriment of established news gathering and reporting enterprises? How are we better served should our papers and reporters disappear?

While online news reports can combine print with audio and video, the idea that they can continue to prosper without the foundation of solid reporting and editing cannot be supported. But rather than maintain that high level of journalistic excellence long admired in the Fourth Estate, the more conventional news media outlets are lowering their standards by hailing “Breaking News” when it isn’t necessarily so. Of course, most news departments now answer to a parent corporation that seems to be more interested in entertaining than informing so maybe we should be less than surprised.

News in print and, to a lesser degree, on television or radio will never be able to compete with the speed of the web. Their futures, though, are safe so long as they strive to maintain the appropriate standards. The internet is maturing and, as it does, many find that credibility is lacking from many sites. Will I pay for online news? If I have to (I’m not stupid, you know). Or perhaps I’ll renew my subscription to the newspaper if it includes some sort of online coordination. Whatever the final format, we all need timely and accurate information. Dressing it up as “Breaking” leads us only to a tomorrow filled with an ever-increasing level of cynicism.