Either that, or Good Morning America gloriously missed a point.
This morning, they aired a segment in which they talked about Disney Channel actress Demi Lovato and her public apology to her fans via social media. I have no idea what she had to apologize for, outside of hearing about her having some sort of fight with a back up dancer or somesuch at a concert. *shrug* I dunno.
I know she stars in a show my kids have watched (and truth be told had a couple of really clever segments. I liked the one in which she and a couple of co-stars played the part of Disney princesses on a "Real Housewives"-type of show. Hi-larious), and I know that Disney is doing all they can to squeeze every cent out of her tween/teen years by having her do a whole pop star thing as well (like they do with almost every actress on any of their shows) before dropping her when she decides to shed her squeeky-clean image (that's a whole other blog right there), but I digress.
The point here is that GMA this morning sees her addressing her fans via social media as "the star taking control" of her re-emergence after being out of the public eye, rather than allowing the traditional media to have a hand in it.
The reason they miss the point is that there is no comparison to Hugh Grant, Jamie Foxx, or any other star that has ever engaged in an all-out mea culpa media campaign.
While the examples I stated above can show up on Leno, Letterman, Dateline, etc to be seen by their fans, tween/teen stars cannot. Their fans don't WATCH Leno, Letterman, etc. Their fans will pay attention to social media like Twitter, Facebook, and Youtube.
It's less that the star involved wants to take control of their own exposure, and more the stars involved want to be seen by their fans, so they are doing what traditional media has failed to do, and recognize that social media is the way to do this.
These young stars and their handlers see that the "old media" just simply doesn't speak to the Internet generation(s). Sure, CBS has Facebook pages, and Leno's monologues can spread like wildfire if there's a funny clip involved, but the vehicle by which such things take place remains the same. Social media.
For years, the national attention span has been dwindling. If it cannot be communicated within a few minutes, as dictated by Youtube limitations, then it is just simply not important enough to know.
While I recognize that this is true, it is sad. That the important news of the day (of which Demi Lovato, or the Royal wedding are NOT) gets lost in quick stories, and the majority of what we laughingly call news is garbage like this. Thousands are dying in what is basically a civil war in Libya, and the only indication that too many Americans have about this is rising gas prices.
But teens know all about Pippa Middleton, an English girl who is sister to a future princess. They know all about Charlie Sheen's mental breakdown, including a video where he is seen drinking from a bottle and waving a machete from a rooftop (video on Youtube).
It seems that the traditional media might need to keep up with social media in order to keep any sort of relevance as those who seek their news online become those who MAKE the news as elected officials, business owners, and the labor force in this country.
Otherwise the United States faces a collapse from within, as did Rome. When people have their bread and circuses, they tend to not worry about what is really going on, leaving those who are making things happen to allow divisions to take hold.
And right now, our young have all the circuses they could possibly want, while the decision makers are divided. History doesn't have to repeat itself, but it sure looks like it is heading in that direction.
And the "old media" is too busy paying attention to the wrong things, and too busy wondering why no one under the age of 30 seems to listen to them, to notice and report it.
