TVSquad

A car chase is news. A car ride isn't.

On June 17, 1994, you, me, and a gazillion other Americans watched O.J. Simpson and his buddy Al Cowlings lead L.A. police on a slow chase in a white Bronco. On September 19, 2007, you, me, and maybe a million other Americans watched O.J. Simpson and his lawyers lead the cable news networks on a slow ride to ... somewhere else.

I'm watching it right now. Not only do we have a helicopter view of O.J. and his lawyers riding around in a grey van, we also have a camera mounted inside a car following O.J., beaming (or whatever cameras mounted inside cars do) pictures to MSNBC on television and the web.

Thank God for all the technological advances in the past 13 years. I wouldn't want to miss anything.

MSNBC anchor Norah O'Donnell keeps talking about how it's interesting that in 1994 we watched a slow chase
with a white Bronco and now we're watching one with a grey sedan. I think somewhere along the line Norah O'Donnell took it upon herself to change the meaning of the word "interesting." And she keeps asking "why is it so fascinating?" and "why is this getting so much media attention?" as we watch a split screen that shows an aerial view of the courthouse on one side and grainy footage of O.J. in the car on the other.

Maybe if the media didn't cover it so much they wouldn't have to ask why it's being covered so much.

The helicopter is suddenly all out of whack and spinning. Boy, wouldn't it be embarrassing to die in a helicopter crash because you were covering O.J. Simpson going to a hotel to pick up his clothes?

You would think that after all the media craziness that happened in 1994 that the cable channels would have learned something about what to cover and what not to cover. I distinctly recall 13 years of analysis, mea culpas, and proposed changes from the cable networks. Things were going to be different. But they're worse. Chris Jansing says that this car chase is reminiscent of the slow speed chase in 1994. Actually, it's not (unless she means that they both involve transportation). At least in 1994 the crime was murder and O.J. was fleeing with money and a fake beard and was possibly suicidal. This time the crime involved signed footballs and news networks following O.J. back to his hotel, presumably to pay the bill and maybe grab that last bag of peanuts from the minibar in his room.

This just breaking on CNN: O.J.'s eating a piece of gum!

This isn't one of those "why are they covering O.J. when people are dying in Iraq!" rants. Simpson getting arrested again so many years after his criminal and civil trials is news. His arraignment is news, especially since there were cameras in the courtroom. But aren't there any producers or news directors at these channels who can say, "you know what? We've covered the hearing for hours, we're talking with lawyers and other experts about it, and later tonight our primetime shows will each cover it in their own way. Maybe we can move on to something else right now and not obsess about whether or not O.J. is sitting in the front seat or the back seat of the car."

Maybe they expect O.J. to just flip out and jump out of the car and run into a White Hen Pantry and take off all of his clothes screaming "I love crayons!" That's a cable news wet dream right there.

Here's a good rule of thumb, cable news networks: If O.J. goes to Anna Nicole Smith's grave and digs up her body, dresses it like Paris Hilton, and then mails it to Michael Jackson, you can consider that news. If he simply goes down to the end of his driveway to get his mail, it isn't.