Frank Borelli
Editor-in-Chief
Officer.com
Farrah Fawcett, Michael Jackson, Ed McMann, Billy Mays... names of celebrities who have died in recent days. Without a doubt Michael Jackson has received the most media coverage with whole sections on news websites dedicated to 'reporting' on every aspect of his life and his death. Some argue that Farrah's long and difficult battle with cancer should receive more attention. Some argue that Ed McMann's lifelong involvement in the entertainment industry warrants more coverage. Others state that, as Michael Jackson was the undisputed 'King of Pop' it only makes sense that he should receive the most 'air time'. As I've recently told several friends of mine in discussion, I think it all boils down to money; to simple dollars.
Let's be ugly honest: the mainstream media... all media for that matter - does not have any commitment to or serious interest in any celebrity unless:
The celebrity owns some portion of the media outlet, or
The media outlet can make some money off the celebrity.
Virtually every media outlet I'm familiar with - including the one I work for - generates revenue through advertising sales. How much they can sell their advertising space for depends entirely on how much traffic they can get. For television it's all about how many viewers they can get. For print it's all about how many subscribers or other readers. To increase the number of viewers / readers / watchers the media outlet has to insure that it has the most interesting, contemporary and interesting (to its target audience) content.
If you look at Farrah, Michael and Ed it's easy to see that Michael's untimely death would draw the most attention; is the most easily leveraged; will help sell the most advertising.
You might ask,
But shouldn't the Jackson estate then be upset because the media is leveraging the death of Michael to make money? The answer is a simple NO. The estate, his family, and all of his fans are happy to see such dedicated coverage because they feel it honors him and his memory. The more mercenarious among them absolutely love the coverage because it will help them continue to make money off the pop icon through the on-going sales of his albums and merchandise.
What does this have to do with law enforcement? Glad you asked...
In every walk of life there are those who seek
nothing more than to make a buck or gain some measure of power. When a police officer is killed in the line of duty that death is sometimes leveraged by an unscrupulous politician to support some pet political agenda. While that politician may
say he (or she) is honoring the fallen officer by supporting some new legislation, what's really going on is that the politician is
using the officer's death to promote something they favor; to gain power; to make money.
Such actions should be held in pure contempt by those of us in the law enforcement community. I have no problem with those who sell products to law enforcement even if the products simply leverage the LE community outlook, twisted humor, or other characteristic we carry with us. I have a
huge problem with anyone who leverages the death of any officer to make a buck. Those people remind me of something I stepped in walking through a field and now I'm having a hard time getting it off my shoe.
Whether you are a fan of any of these celebrities or not; whether you liked what they did or not; whether you thought well or ill of them - honor them minimally by not disrespecting the dead. We all will be one day. If you are moved to do so, honor them by remembering the impact they had on your life or appreciating the art their talent contributed to.
No matter what you do with regard to the deaths of celebrities, when it comes to the deaths of our law enforcement professionals, loath and boycott all those who would make a dollar publicizing or leveraging those sacrifices. They died in honor. Remember them the same way.
What do you think?
