Friday, June 13, 2008

personality driven TV

Something weird happens internally when a news reporter dies. Think about it. These people are in your lives every day at 5:30 p.m. reporting the important things you need to know that day. The warm glow from the television feels like body heat and it's almost like they are really in front of you. You begin a new level of camaraderie with this person as they share things with you that could change your day. They aren't playing a "part" on t.v.-they are themselves, with their own bias, sharing real information. It's reality TV at is best. It's like a friend, a stern friend, a matter of fact friend that speaks into your life whether you are ready or not. They usually hold the role as anchor as long as they can so you may see them over many, many years on the same station, listening to the same theme music. He or she is a part of your life - a part of this era of our lives - whether we ever watch the news or not. 

When Peter Jennings died, something inside of me changed. As long as I could remember, Peter Jennings reported the nightly news to my family (I started watching the nightly news around age 7). He shared, day in and day out, the news to my family. It was odd when he took time off and wasn't in the anchor chair-the stand in just couldn't fill the shoes of my nightly anchor. He was Peter Jennings, my news anchor. When he passed, it was like a part of my childhood had died. I had gotten so used to him sitting there, sharing the newest information. 

I relived this moment today with the news of Tim Russert passing away today. Tim was a devout Catholic, a man of honesty and integrity (or so the media says, since I didn't know him personally). I was saddened-even if I did change the channel on Sunday mornings so I didn't have to hear the "Meet the Press" intro music. An end of an era is approaching, like it did with Peter Jennings. 

What is an interesting parallel to me is the concept of the same pastor/teacher teaching in the same "pulpit" for however many years they serve. They show up on Sundays, and people expect to see that person (usually a man...just sayin). They get comfortable with that same teacher each week that when they go on vacation or spend a sunday out of the "pulpit" you usually hear things like, 'so and so did a good job teaching, but it just wasn't (name pastor here)'. Some people won't show up on a Sunday if they don't hear the teacher of choice, just like how I would change the channel if Peter Jennings wasn't the one reporting that night. 

Is this a bad thing? maybe not...but it really puts a lot of pressure on that teacher to not take too much time off, be prepared to have the most refreshing message each week. It also doesn't give the opportunity for other teachers to rise up and use their gifts, which just enforces the entertainment model, consumeristic mindset that unfortunately many Christians endorse (at least with their actions). And if that person moves churches or God forbid, dies-the church is then going through a huge identity crisis as it was personality driven. But there is something comfortable with the same person up there each week, sharing God's word to change my life. But...then again, it all comes back to me and my comfort.

I am saddened by the passing of Tim Russert today, but maybe with his passing opens a chance of a new leader to take his place. Maybe NBC will now rotate anchors, so not one person is so attached to the same warm glow, the same personality that is broadcasted each day. But then again... the news report is based on personalities. 

The church isn't. 

3 comments:

Gibbytron said...

or is it? ;)

sarah said...

I think no matter how much we try, there is always a bit of personality behind whoever is in the teaching seat. But the hope is that we would have enough personalities around that we can pass it off to the others when it is needed that are at least equally engaging. But yes, who wants a dry, dull, boring teaching pastor? Or someone who is not in touch with culture?

I wonder how much personality was put into the early church with Paul, Peter, etc. Paul especially when he talks in 1 Corinthians 2.

thoughts?

Franny said...

Woooaah woah woah. I love that we are both life-long nerds :) I kinda miss PJ, too.

I think the American church is totally based on the cult of personality created by pastors, priests, worship leaders, etc. The church, being a social institution as well as a holy one, is extremely sensitive to (and influenced by) the "needs" of the parishioner. If they "need" a charismatic, energetic, or interesting speaker, slowly but surely, that's what they'll get. It's not just that people with those personalities emerge as leaders, it's that the personality that we like as learners/viewers/members of a flock is all of those things that a newscaster tends to be. That's the American way ! (It's so different from many other cultures, where the most respected leaders are demure, soft-spoken, humbly intimidating leaders. A couple of tribes/clans in Africa come to mind: the one in New Guinea that I think eats their dead, and to some degree, the modern Japanese leadership structure.

And geez, Paul ? Paul was SOOOOO the American Idol of the early church. He reminds me of my coworker who is like the DARLING of the organization, and everyone just gushes over the changes he's made, the programs he's started, the committees he leads... It really only takes one personality to start a revolution (Hitler ? Lenin ? Helloooooo, charisma !), but it needs new personalities every generation to keep the ball rolling.

Dang I love behavioural psychology/anthropology.

And duuhhh, I love you too!