Jurassic Park Author Dedicated Entire Novel to Fake Media Before Fake Media was a Thing
In 1996, Michael Crichton of Jurassic Park, The Lost World and Andromeda Strain fame published a lesser known novel called “Airframe“. The novel is about an airplane failure that threatened to bring down an American airplane frame manufacturer even though the plane was proven to be safe. When a popular television programme of the “60 Minutes” ilk was going to air a piece on the “death trap” airplane, then the truth accepted by viewers would have been one manufactured by a media concerned with ratings rather than facts. This would have resulted in the loss of thousands of American jobs, but who cares, eh?
I just could not help but make comparisons in my mind to the “Israel situation” when reading about how the news had become entertainment rather than informative. And entertainment is emotion-driven regardless of which emotion is being elicited at any given time.
On page 212, Crichton writes (emphasis in the original):
On a show like Newsline, the frame was all-important. Older producers on the show talked about “context,” which to them meant putting the story in a larger setting. Indicating what the story meant, by reporting what had happened before, or reporting similar things that had occurred. The older guys thought context so important, they seemed to regard it as a kind of moral or ethical obligation.
Jennifer disagreed. Because when you cut out all the sanctimonious bullshit, context was just spin, a way of pumping the story — and not a very useful way, because context meant referring to the past.
Jennifer had no interest in the past, she was one of the new generation that understood that gripping television was now, events happening now, a flow of images in a perpetual unending electronic present.
And he continues Jennifer’s line of thought:
What she was looking for was a way to shape the story so that it unfolded now, in a pattern that the viewer could follow. The best frames engaged the viewer by presenting the story as conflict between good and bad, a morality story. Because the audience got that. If you framed a story that way, you got instant acceptance. You were speaking their language.
But because the story also had to unfold quickly, this morality tale had to hang from a series of hooks that did not need to be explained. Things the audience already knew to be true. They already knew big corporations [or Israel?] were corrupt, their leaders greedy sexist pigs [or genocidal criminals in the case of Israel?]. You didn’t have to prove that; you just had to mention it. . . .
From such agreed-upon elements, she must construct her morality story.
A fast-moving morality story, happening now.
I do not want to give any spoilers in case you may be interested in reading the book. I enjoyed it and you may as well. But let me just say that even after the truth has been revealed to the media personalities involved in preparing and producing the eventually shelved item, the truth is never revealed to the public. And the truth is never revealed in order to protect particular interests. It is astounding to learn who else is never even let in on the secret.
The novel, Airframe, as a metaphor for Israel is so chilling.