Wag the Dog?

Every couple of years, there's a renewed interest in blaming Hollywood for kids' smoking.
It's that time again.
Now, I don't mean to imply that's a bad thing, just that everything -- from awareness campaigns to the seasons -- is cyclical.
Take, for instance, journalistic standards.
There was a bit of a to-do over the recent decision by the Tribune Co., owner of such papers as Newsday, the Chicago Trib and the L.A. Times, to allow its newspapers to put advertising on its front pages. Is this development the innovative big idea needed to save newspapers in times of flagging circulation and revenue figures? (Yawn) Hardly.
In fact, let's place the blame squarely on the shoulders of those at the Wall Street Journal, which announced its front page was no longer sacred ground more than one year ago.
Should we take umbrage over the commercialization (read: blatant sell-out) of a product that has allowed Madison Avenue to triumph over credibility? Well, we could, but much like the new anti-Hollywood movie smoking campaign, this, too, is cyclical. Newspapers decades ago ran advertising on their front pages until, poof, someone somewhere decided it was a bad idea and reclaimed page 1 as prime real estate for news.
Newsies are quite the pack animals, in case you didn't know. Once one breaks from the herd, the rest follow. Well, some are slower than others, to be sure; but rest assured, they all end up in the same place.
That's why one of the most common criticisms of television and cable news is that it all looks the same. Of course it does. If one person has a story, the rest of the pack scrambles to get it, too.
If one station or network decides it's going to stream news continuously across the bottom of your television screen, then by jolly, let's all do it!
Deep down inside, they just want to be liked, to be included, to be special. In that quest for individualism, they all end up looking the same, because they all hire the same consultant. It's really rather sad, isn't it?
The first reality show was a hit, most likely because it brought the viewer something new and fresh and interesting. Television's response was to bring viewers 22 reality shows the next season. In doing so, that which was appreciated for being out of the ordinary became commonplace.
Knowing that's the way it works, advertising moving to the forefront of newspapers shouldn't be much of a surprise. After all, all journalistic standards swing back and forth on the pendulum of public consciousness.
Worried photos are too graphic? Sure, there was a time when only the chalk or security tape outline of a body was photographed -- as long as there wasn't any blood. That changed with the O.J. trial.
You'd never see photos or footage of someone jumping out of a building. Then came Sept. 11.
As the news media continues to take lumps for loosening up its standards, the pendulum reminds us this, too, will change. Just take a look at some early newspapers with photographs of criminals after their electrocution. Suddenly, blood on a sidewalk pales by comparison.
The continuous yin and yang of news standards, aided and abetted by public appetite, is the most intriguing element of this whole thing.
Is the news simply giving you what you want, or is it defining for you what you need?
Will a new generation of kids take up smoking, even if they never see smoking in a movie? Why we do instinctively look to point fingers when standards change, as opposed to examining how we got here?
Would our world be a better place if the pendulum simply stood still?