It's not surprising anymore.
The mandatory over-coverage of another anniversary of the 1906 SF earthquake took center stage on Bay Area media outlets.
What else is new? Nothing, really. And that's just the point.
There are the same tired old stories. The same live shots at the same spot on Market Street where we don't learn anything more, no new information, no overly important element or, better yet, de-velopment other than the usual ho-hum few folks over a hundred years old that were around the city that April morning. God bless 'em for having survived the quake and father time to still be on the planet.
But after that, and the same old shots of the same old video and archived footage we've seen over and over, what else is there to report? I mean, talk about been there/done that reverberated to the umpth degree.
Certainly, the 1906 Earthquake is a significant part of San Francisco history and its impact on the region, both at the time and now. But its place as a legitimate news story beyond an acknowledgement and a few live shots has meandered into a point where it's now lost its significance, it's real place.
The manner in which it's now covered is simply an instant tune-out factor personified. We could understand the brouhaha if it were a hundred-year anniversary. We got that treatment six years ago. We'd be deluged with massive look-backs and retrospectives in time. We'd get a gazillion shots of the fire, the smoke and general appearance of a city in ruins thanks to Mother Nature's attitude in 06.
But that was then and this is now.
Do we really need 3-plus minutes of this at the top of the hour on KCBS? And yes, every local TV outlet had the obligatory reporter on Market covering, (again), the usual inane "historical moment" just after 5 AM, followed by the usual cavorting up-street at Castro and Market, the scene of the same-old fire hydrant that supposedly played a part in dousing a portion of the fire that, blah, blah, blah.
I'm going to get hosed for dare suggesting that this has become an utter bore. We know what happened. We read the history books. And yes, we've been told a million times since and will be told another million times that another one is coming. The BIG one, followed by reporter's requisite visit to the USGS to quiz an "expert" on the likelihood that we're all about to experience the BIG one sometime soon, maybe in an hour, maybe in a few minutes and how we should really be "preparing."
Fine, I've heard that story before. Usually on this day. And again next year when we go through this same silly exercise once again and again and again...
I have a simple request.
Give us a quick interview of someone who was there back then and some video and then move on. Please.
We have things to do, people to visit. I'd almost rather listen to a mattress commercial or 800-Kars-for-Kids jingles than anything having to do with the SF Earthquake. God forbid we experience anything like it again in our lifetime, but see, so far, we ain't been there yet. If we piss off God and God decides to give us a 21st Century shake, rattle and roar, OK, then get twenty satellite trucks over to the hell taking place on the bridges and the fires and the mayhem and then, and only then, do we need any more coverage.
Matter of fact, I'm sick of earthquakes in general. The only time I want to hear about a quake is when we get one over 7 or 8. Or when KNBR and KGO's tower takes them off the air so I can listen to traffic and weather together on KCBS, got it?
*Follow me on Twitter
It's not that big a deal. History. That's all. The remembrance of an event that changed the local landscape, literally. Much of subsequent bay area happenings flow from what happened in the aftermath of the quake and fire (my own family became refugees to the East Bay, where we remain today). Your complaining sounds like what eight graders do when they grouse about having to take a 'meaningless' Constitution test ....
ReplyDeleteConsidering that we haven't yet finished the repairs required by the 1986 earthquake, I don't think we are overly preoccupied by the topic.
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure there are any '06 survivors left, are there? I thought the last one croaked a few years ago. I mean, they'd have to be at least 106 years old....
ReplyDeleteBelieve it or not, there are still four. Heard on the radio today they are 106 (2), 108, 109.
DeleteIt's not for you, Rich, it's for the younger people who haven't heard it as many times.
ReplyDeleteTake the "almost" out of the equation on the 1-800-kars for kids fungalspot. I'd rather listen to Celene Dion.
ReplyDeleteSpeaking of that jingle..if silicon valley has all that money the A's say they do for sports advertising..why RICH, are the main advertisers for both teams..Moscowitz att.,Kars 4kids,a eye DR.,and two mattress companys?
ReplyDeleteAnybody ever heard Google or Apple,or Microsoft advertise on any sports event?
"S"
Nothing can make me dive for station selection buttons faster than a "Kars for Kids" jingle... well maybe any song sung by Adele.
ReplyDeleteI, personally, am sick to death of the shoes for foster kids ads. They are on every station everywhere (and on TV too). Is it really true that foster kids never have had new shoes??? I mean, a pair of shoes is not a major purchase and I can't believe a foster family wouldn't buy a kid a pair of shoes without holes in them. Maybe not Nikes, but there are many shoes that are easily affordable. Ever heard of Payless Shoe source, Big 5 etc.?? That ad is more annoying to me now than the Kars for Kids because it plays several times an hour all over the dial.
DeleteAdele, really? You pick the one contemporary artist with a super talent to grouse about? Weird pick Don.
ReplyDeleteWith good reason! The radio stations have played her to death. If I was her agent I would ask stations to leave her along for awhile. Sirius is the worse for this. I bet the Blend and Spectrum play her once an hour. Too much of a good thing...... Me thinks, no offense to Adele.
DeleteA stop to 24 hour coverage of the 1906 earthquake?
ReplyDeleteThat will never happen Rich. San Francisco media (see the Chronicle) is in love with itself. Never met a media so self-absored with themselves.
SF the narcisstic capital of the world.
The 1906 quake is part of San Francisco's history and will always be noteworthy. The media that you deride is focused with good reason on local stories. That's what they are paid for and that is what the local community wants. This is a local story par excellence.
DeleteGiven the rate of corporate consolidation, we should be grateful that we have any local media left at all.
I think one of your posters made a good point earlier Rich. Sure, it becomes boring and excessive to those who have been around for awhile, but there are still a fair number of young people today
ReplyDelete(not as big a percentage as in past years) who get a lot of info off the radio or TV. This is why it's important to continue chronicling the important historical events of our time.
Just because it happened 234 years ago, should our news media also ignore the signing of the Declaration of Independence? Or how
about Pearl Harbor in 1941? People who were there ar=nd are caught up in the here and the now need to know about where they came from and what happened before they came. It's called having an historical prospective...something that unfortunately is sadly lacking in our instant-info, push button society.
I am in agreement. We should avoid any mention of anything that is older than a week. Who cares that SF burned to the ground 104 years ago? It's old news and nobody needs to know about it. Give us more crap about Barbieri and Owens. Now THAT'S news. America, where the citizenry luxuriate in their ignorance of their own history.
ReplyDeleteThe 1906 San Francisco earthquake . . . .Nobody cares.
ReplyDeleteI'd still rather hear Kars for Kids than Tom Shane.
ReplyDeleteAn old saying is true..."Those who don't remember the past, are doomed to repeat it." I believe all of this about the SF 1906 Earthquake is for all of us to be prepared for the Big One, cause its gonna come
ReplyDelete