Folks- today I would like to talk about the growing trend in the media of sensationalism. The practice of taking reporting the news to a level that diminishes the actual 'news' and delivers a 'story'. And there is an important distinction there. News' is defined as "information about recent events or developments." Meanwhile 'Story' can be defined as "a factual or fictional account of an event or series of events." This can further also be defined as "the plot of a novel, play, motion picture, or other narrative work." The reason I point this out is because we now live in an age where we need to be drawn in. We are a culture that only keeps reading or listening if we are affected or connecting on a personal or emotional level. News in and of its self isn't flashy. News in the 21st century is competing to draw in viewers that would sooner checkFacebook on their smartphone for some quick news blurbs rather than pull out a newspaper or wait for the eleven o'clock news.
As such news has risen to the attention-seeking challenge and goes into over-drive affecting your psychological responses to what it's reporting. While this isn't only an issue relating to the Cruise industry, I have noted that ever since the infamous 'Poop Cruise' of the Carnival Triumph, the media goes into warp speed when it comes to reporting on any story involving something negative aboard a cruise ship. Take this recent headline regarding the Carnival Spirit and storms it endured in Australia earlier this week: "Passengers speak of terrifying ordeal on battered Carnival Spirit" - Daily Mail 4/22. And in case you missed this story, the Carnival Spirit was on its way back from a 12 day itinerary to Sydney. Unfortunately the Sydney harbor was being rocked by a pretty severe storm which caused the port to shut down for the day. This caused the Spirit to have to ride out the storm outside the harbor. Now I don't mean to suggest this wasn't a pretty bad storm- there were 40 foot swells and heavy winds up to 85mph. For your average cruise passenger I'm sure it was quite a negative experience. After all most of us are used to a smooth sailing and ships that usually have the option to track around a storm instead of right into it. However the thing to understand is that ships are built to endure far more than we give them credit for. In the case of the Spirit, the captain had to await till the port would reopen when the storm abated. His ship was obviously up to the challenge. Had he feared for the safety of his ship, crew, and guests, obviously he would have sailed away. Words like 'battered' in the title are used to set the scene. You had waves crashing against the hull of the ship. Again I'm sure to many this was a little disconcerting. When you continue to read the article is where it gets worse. "4000 passengers and crew trapped for two days on cruise liner smashed by 40ft waves as epic storms battered Australia relive ordeal after boat finally limped to port." Now if this doesn't paint a picture to make you fear cruising ever again, I don't know what will. The ship was 'smashed' by waves implies the hull began to buckle. The boat 'limped' to port implies that she lost power or engine capacity of some sort and barely made it to the dock with the engines sputtering. But I suppose it makes for a more interesting read than "After braving the storm for an extra day, the ship cruised into port under full power. Many reportedly got seasick."
One can't even accuse them of misrepresenting the facts because the facts are there- buried under the tinsel of an exciting adventure story. What it is though is a purely sensational version of what happened. It was designed to evoke compassion for the poor passengers who endured a LOT more rocking than they were used to. It was designed to make you question the safety of cruising which has been a hot button issue in recent times. With events like the Splendor fire, the Triumph incapacitated, the fire aboard the Grandeur of the Seas, and most notably- the sinking of the Costa Concordia. But in light of all those events I almost think the Spirit should be painted in a better light. Here is a ship that got into a tussle with Mother Nature, she took some hits, and kept on ticking! I don't want to downplay the discomfort of the passengers, with larger than usual waves slapping the hull I'm sure it was a bit off-putting and resulted in a lot of seasickness. But the ship didn't lose power, she didn't lose engines, or control of herself, hot food continued to be served, passengers still had the option to be entertained. I think the best of a bad day was made and the Spirit should be applauded, not made a terror subject.
In today's reporting I just believe you need to be able to cut through some of the theatrics of story-telling to really understand what happened. And this is not just a problem when reporting on the cruise industry, but in all news anymore. Sensationalism is what gathers viewers and readers, but if you're not aware of it you can be easily sucked into the predetermined view of the reporting without the benefit of allowing yourself to think about on your own. It's very much the same in cruising with folks that read cruise reviews on Cruise Critic and only use them to decide if they will sail a ship or not. As a society I think it's important to not be spoon-fed our opinions but endeavor to find out for ourselves what is what.
With that I will now remove myself from my soap box! Thanks for reading everybody!
Sorry had to re-edit the first paragraph
ReplyDelete