Although I’m often discouraged when I read newspaper headlines, this week was an exception.
BBC News reported that the Earth Hour initiative, which protests against climate change, had participants from more than 3,400 towns in 88 countries. The Globe and Mail reported that, on March 28, thousands engaged in marches throughout Europe expressing concerns about employment, the economy and the environment.
People are taking a stand. Voices are being heard. Although such protests imply there are issues that must be dealt with, the organized reactions of individuals also suggest a hope for progress.
This week, I felt empowered. I was permitted to clap my hands rather than bitterly point my finger at stories of hypocrisy, treachery and violence.
Media should focus not only on shocking or horrifying their audience, but also on allowing readers to celebrate.
In an age where censorship is increasingly frowned upon, it appears there’s a double standard for what is suppressed by the media. As readers, do we demand the right to be informed not only of economic crises but also of heartwarming events?
According to the New Oxford American Dictionary, censorship is “the practice of officially examining books, movies, etc., and suppressing unacceptable parts.” Unfortunately, publications often give preference to a frowning readership instead of one cheering with pompoms and yellow-striped batons.
If non-censorship is to be praised, it is also to be fully exercised.
I was provoked by author Eugene H. Peterson’s statement that “a writer has far more imaginative material to work with in presenting a bad character than a good person. […] Good people, virtuous lives, mostly seem a bit dull.” Indeed, readers and writers are more frequently captivated by a front-page story of a monstrous gunman’s criminal charges than that of a woman’s courage in facing breast cancer.
Personally, I also find it more difficult to praise than to criticize.
Good writers, however, should be capable of stimulating and maintaining the interest of readers with both good and bad news.
Contemporary media reflect a societal trend that favours celebrity gossip magazines, melancholy music and fiercely-competitive reality TV shows. As a result, literature caters to the taste of an audience that ironically delights in misfortune.
Criticism is no historical novelty. This week, I found myself flinging my Restoration and 18th-Century English literature anthology on my desk because I couldn’t handle reading another cynical poem about humanity’s endless and unalterable cycle of doom.
Although I agree that life is unfair and disheartening, I also think I would miss out on a great deal if I failed to appreciate examples of human success and genuine philanthropy.
I won’t, and don’t want to, be completely satisfied with the state of society, but I still want to celebrate.
Don’t censor my smile.
All final editorial decisions are made by the Editor(s) in Chief and/or the Managing Editor. Authors should not be ed, targeted, or harassed under any circumstances. If you have any grievances with this article, please direct your comments to [email protected].