One summer afternoon when I was a young boy in Michigan, I was lying on my back in a field staring up at a large tree. It was one of those windless days, hot and still.
After a while, I realized that a single leaf was for no apparent reason turning on its stem. As far as I could see, this leaf was identical to all the other leaves on the tree, but it was the only one moving.
Why?
One leaf turning might have a story. Many leaves holding in place most likely do not.
The problem with this for journalists is that by focusing on the exception to the rule, we may give the impression that the rule is no longer in order. An example of this is crime reporting. Covering one shocking crime too intensely can create the illusion that an entire city is “awash in crime” when the fact is the opposite is true.
In fact, most dramatic crimes are actually just anomalies.
Of course, there is an entirely different way to tell any story. That solitary leaf I saw may have been ahead of its time — portending a climate disaster to come when all the other leaves remained quiet, steady in place, doing what they were expected to do.
In other words, the swinging leaf was a whistleblower, a ‘canary in the coal mine,’ an indicator of bigger problems.
On to the investigative reporter, who picks up on the signal and spots a pattern that may provide an explanation for the turning leaf. After observing hundreds of trees, with many thousands of leaves, and interviewing numerous scientists, none of whom can say for sure, the reporter writes a more nuanced story based on the data.
In this new story, we learn that there are many such single leaves on many trees turning slowly on windless days where no one is there to see. But it is also possible that if no one saw them then that didn’t really happen. (Quantum physics.) Then again, perhaps there is a new disease affecting our trees that we need to address if we are to save the forest.
Anyone trying to follow these various stories may think back to that one single leaf turning on a windless day long ago. In that case, you might say that the storyteller wasn’t able to see the forest for the trees.
(This is the latest version of one of my oldest essays.)
HEADLINES:
Iran warns of ‘strong responses’ as Israel’s attacks on Lebanon threaten ceasefire (NBC)
How Pakistan managed to get the US and Iran to a ceasefire (Al Jazeera)
How Iran’s supreme leader reached a truce with Trump (Axios)
Why ceasefire deal with US has unsettled Iran’s hardliners (BBC)
Trump’s Iran brinkmanship reaches truce, escalates backlash at home (WP)
Hegseth declares victory in Iran but says US forces will remain in region (Politico)
What is in Iran’s 10-point ceasefire plan and will the US agree to it? (Guardian)
Iran Strait of Hormuz warning adds to shipping uncertainty (BBC)
Israel kills dozens in Beirut, claims Lebanon is not part of Iran truce (WP)
Wall Street, global markets surge after US-Iran ceasefire sends oil prices below $100 a barrel (AP)
An Incredibly Weird Time to Be Alive (Atlantic)
Nuclear brinksmanship usually works. It’s also incredibly dangerous. (Silver Bulletin)
The Trump Administration Is Trying to Erase Its Own History (Atlantic)
Warnings for the G.O.P.: 3 Takeaways From the Elections in Georgia and Wisconsin (NYT)
“People are choosing this fate”: Measles will get worse before it gets better (Salon)
China’s retaliation against Panama has backfires across Latin America (The Hill)
Route 66, a quintessential American road trip heavy on kitsch and history, turns 100 (AP)
How Accurate Are Google’s A.I. Overviews? (NYT)
No comments:
Post a Comment