Queen Mum dies :-(
30 Mar 2002 21:42:47 -0500
On Sat, 2002-03-30 at 21:31, Bill Humphries wrote:
> I said what I said because I expected what happened when Princess Diana
> died back in 1997: the signal to noise ratio of the world's media dropping
> to near zero. Checking the press today, my fears are not realized. Perhaps
> it's because there's a war on. Perhaps the press realized how foul it was
> to go All-Di, All-the-Time.
Well, the biggest difference (IMHO) from a press perspective is that
Diana was young, photogenic, and 'tragic'; tragedy is 'news' while the
death of a woman of 101 (who was beautiful in her day but hadn't been
photogenic since before the invention of color TV) is expected, and
hence not as 'newsworthy'. I'm sure Diana's death, had it happened right
now, would still have recieved a lot more press than the Queen Mother's.
Which, I agree, is a sad commentary on the state of the media.
> On Saturday, March 30, 2002, at 11:48 AM, Luis Villa wrote:
> > He didn't exactly get much distraction; it took about 30 minutes before
> > CNN switched back to a Bush press conference followed by extended
> > discussion of Israel and Arafat again.
> No doubt that the celebrity press will focus on this, however, I can
> ignore the celebrity press.
> On Saturday, March 30, 2002, at 04:51 PM, Gary Lawrence Murphy wrote:
> > Depends. What did she do for world peace, or for the moral of a
> > demoralized nation in economic and structural tatters?
> My mom raised four children without a subsidy. But I'll ask what did the
> Queen Mother do in the post-WWII environment? Apparently she did good, and
> yes, that's a memory that should be honored.
> > This has nothing to do with Britain or Monarchy.
> I agree, my complaint had to do with media and celebrity culture. And if I
> made the mistake of conflating the Queen Mother with people who are famous
> simply for being famous, then I was chasing the wrong rabbit.
> > Were I old enough to
> > have been aware at the time, I would have bemoaned the loss of Eleanor
> > Roosevelt for very similar reasons, but I doubt I'll notice the
> > passing of any of the First Ladies since I have come of age. They
> > just don't make 'em like that anymore.
> Roosevelt's efforts are well known to me, but I did not know that the
> Queen Mother was involved in humanitarian work. All I knew of the family
> was the constant parade of covers in the celebrity magazines that my ex is
> fond of.
> In summary, I appologize to the the list for making some ill-considered
> comments, and confess that I did not have the facts of the matter in hand.
> -- whump