Newscasts too often employ scare tactics

In the just-released film “Bowling for Columbine,” director Michael Moore applies his pell-mell, guerrilla-filmmaking style to examining why Americans seem to love guns and so frequently shoot one another. Along the way, his accusing lens points at everything from the National Rifle Assn. to the national psyche.

Amid Moore’s scattershot theories, however, one squarely nails its target -- namely, the nightly news’ role in making the public more frightened than it should be, contributing to some people feeling the need to arm themselves to the teeth. Because for all the talk about taking a higher road post-Sept. 11, TV news relies more heavily than ever on cheap scare tactics -- particularly in its promotion -- as a means of getting viewers to tune in.

The rap on local TV news has always been its “If it bleeds, it leads” mind-set. Yet in an age when sniper killings and anthrax mailings instantly yield their own slickly packaged graphics, an equally valid description might be “If it scares, we care.”

For TV news, the allure of “This could happen to you” stories is intoxicating, the latest case study being coverage of the recent sniper shootings near Washington, D.C. As terrible as those reports are, they pale compared to the number of murders seen almost nightly in an average big-city newscast, the difference here being the maddening randomness of the victims.

Ted Koppel conceded as much on Friday’s “Nightline,” observing that the media were “going nuts” over what he correctly characterized as a “dreadful but relatively minor threat” in the bigger scheme of things.

Moreover, it’s not just those incorrigible local newscasts that succumb to such excess. Consider a report from the Washington, D.C.-based Center for Media and Public Affairs tabulating how network news coverage of child abductions soared this summer thanks to a few high-profile cases, despite FBI data indicating that such kidnappings are actually down this year.

Without knowing those statistics, you certainly wouldn’t think that’s the case from watching TV news, just as a casual observer would have doubtless assumed there was a shark-attack epidemic the year before. In releasing its findings, center President Robert Lichter concluded, “As much as we thought the media changed after 9/11, their obsession with kidnappings shows a reversion to form.”

Strictly from a business standpoint, this is understandable. After all, what could be more horrifying to parents in the advertiser-friendly 25-to-54 age demographic, who are more likely to have young children, than the threat of someone snatching kids? In that respect, child abductions are the perfect made-for-TV news story, as is anything that can be teased “Your children could be in danger. Find out at 11,” from asbestos in schools to razor blades in parks and playgrounds.

Indeed, reviewing the damning images in Moore’s comedy-documentary-propaganda piece -- including his chat with NRA President Charlton Heston and ambush interview of Dick Clark -- nothing matches the one shot capturing these priorities, as TV news crews form a lemming-like line outside a Michigan funeral home that houses the body of a 6-year-old murder victim.

Academics refer to the cumulative effect of this numbing drumbeat as the “mean world syndrome,” positing that heavy TV viewers see the world -- including their own community -- as being more violent and fearful than it really is.

Among the fatuous pronouncements often made about the correlation between media and societal violence, this theory has the benefit of making the most intuitive sense -- and it’s supported by research showing that people who watch lots of TV tend to overestimate their chances of being victimized.

Still, the tricks of the trade exist for a reason. Even for media-savvy viewers, it’s difficult not to pause when flipping past Fox News Channel or CNN and seeing “News Alert” plastered across the screen -- prompting a momentary “Oh no, what now?” hiccup before one realizes the “alert” as often as not refers to something that happened the day before.

In short, news operates the way it does because human nature makes us vulnerable to its basest ploys. So close-to-home perils will always trump faraway ones, and a faraway threat becomes more compelling if it can be prefaced “Could it happen here?” or promoted as “What you don’t know” can hurt or kill you.

Forget snakes and high places. To TV news directors, this is the true “Fear Factor.”

As the “mean world” turns, it doesn’t help, either, that prime time has become one big crime blotter, including three editions of NBC’s “Law & Order.” This logjam makes crafting fresh story lines no small feat and may explain why “Special Victims Unit” opened its season with a female serial killer, a real-life phenomenon that occurs as frequently as the Anaheim Angels reach the World Series.

Not to be outdone, CBS has television’s top-rated show now in “CSI: Crime Scene Investigation” and added four new crime dramas this fall, among them the spinoff “CSI: Miami” and near-spinoff “Without a Trace.” The latter, focusing on the FBI’s missing persons unit, has already featured an episode in which a pedophile lures an 11-year-old boy from home via the Internet.

In a nutshell, crime pays. And while it’s unlikely “CSI” will make you want to shoot your neighbor, it isn’t an illogical leap to speculate that viewing enough of it might make that stranger approaching on a darkened street seem more apt to mean you harm.

October has always been a time for fright-fests, with Halloween providing inspiration for a host of eerie documentaries and movie marathons. Still, if you want a scare sure to keep the kids huddled under their bedsheets year-round, just pick up the remote and look for someone sitting behind a desk at 5, 6 or 11.

*

Brian Lowry’s column appears Wednesdays. He can be reached at brian.lowry@latimes.com.