By now, the journalism community has had a chance to grasp the unfortunate loss of Peter Jennings. Jennings, who passed away on August 7 from lung cancer, was a pioneer in the broadcast journalism field, and will be sincerely missed by colleagues, peers, and viewers.
However, now that the initial shock is over, media is swarming to use Jennings as a face for the ravages of lung cancer. Jennings was a longtime smoker, who despite attempts to quit, never fully kicked the habit.
According to colleague Barbara Walters, “If anything good can come from this terrible loss, hopefully it will be that people stop smoking.”
Did we need Peter Jennings to die before we could realize the tragic effects of smoking?
Simply put, no.
It is truly unfortunate that Peter Jennings passed away from such an avoidable disease. I by no means intend to cheapen his death. However, it is the fact that media is swarming to put forth “special reports” on the effects of smoking that upsets me.
Smoking is bad for you. Smoking has always been bad for you. We’ve known this for a long time. Did you miss the gigantic notice on cigarette billboards? Hell, those letters have to be about five feet tall, when you think about it. Or the fact that cigarettes have a “sin tax” (at least in Ohio)? That might be a signal that THEY ARE BAD FOR YOU.
I lost both of my paternal grandparents at a young age from lung cancer – one from firsthand smoking, the other from secondhand smoke. I don’t need a face to stick on this disease to tell me smoking is bad. But despite the fact I love my grandparents dearly, the simple fact is, they are just another statistic in the grand scheme of things. Over 163,000 Americans will die from lung cancer this year. A gross and disgusting, ugly statistic. Ugly, but true.
If the death of Peter Jennings can influence someone, one person, to quit smoking, then that is fantastic. But if people haven’t been swayed anti-smoking commercials, campaigns, surgeon general warnings, and deaths of friends and loved ones, chances are this isn't going to hit them as anything other than an unfortunate loss of human life.
Which is what this should be seen as, not a chance to raise up another cancer martyr. Peter Jennings smoked for decades. It’s not going to take an episode of CSI to figure out what happened.
Is it tragic? Yes. Surprising? No.
When Morgan Spurlock came out with his documentary “Super-Size Me,” the media was abuzz with the negative health affects of fast food. Thing is, nothing Spurlock did was revolutionary. We know fast food is bad for your health. Thanks for the update, but nobody has been touting Big Macs as part of a balanced, healthy diet. Peter Jennings and the results of smoking are no different. We get it. Smoking is bad.
Let Peter Jennings pass with dignity and respect, as a journalist whose time came too soon. Period. End of story. Don’t try to make it into some sort of crusade against Big Tobacco – there is already plenty of that going on with questionable response from the American public.
Instead, regard the situation as it should be. As an unfortunate loss of an American icon.
Article comments
1 - Natalie Davis
Everything you say is true, Ms. Lou. Peter Jennings himself was behind a lot of the news reporting exposing the sins of tobacco companies. People (including myself) watch and set the information aside. Smokers know that it is bad, that it is dangerous, that it can kill. Fact is, though, it sometimes takes a personalization of the issue to make it really real for some humans. ABC News says it has received thousands and thousands of letters and emails from people who say they will quit the habit after seeing what happened to Jennings. Will all of these viewers put a halt to puffing? Probably not, but a sizeable amount will. Add to that news of the lung-cancer-caused death of Barbara "Miss Ellie" Bel Geddes and Dana Reeve's lung-cancer diagnosis. Absolutely, it can appear unseemly to pimp dead and sick celebs. But doing so does convince some to quit, just as my father-in-law's death from lung cancer pushed Spousal Unit to stop smoking. Personalizing the issue can be a good thing. Hasn't worked yet for me, which admittedly is particularly stupid given that I have diabetes, but on many levels, I don't give a crap. For those who do, however, these stories can be a powerful catalyst toward healthier behaviors. Why complain about that?
2 - Nancy
I find this to be typical of the media: they're very cavalier about other people's pain & suffering - until it comes home to one of "them", and then they're stunned, outraged, indignant, sad, etc. Like the rest of us were ants and not as human as "they" are. More posturing on their part. It'll be a 3-day wonder & then they'll all flock to something else, like the vultures they are.
3 - Sara Reid
Great news career? Yes, of course. Missed by millions? Sure. Idiot who killed himself over a long period of time? Definitely. Smoking is no different than suicide. The only difference is that smokers drag their loved ones along to join in their suffering. I hope that Peter Jenning's death inspires some sense in someone. I'm losing friends and loved ones everyday to a selfish addiction. Wake up, world.
4 - Jonathan Pinard
Sara Reid, "idiot who killed himself"?
Lung cancer seems to be one of the few diseases that has the side effect of making everyone an expert in disease diagnosis, prevention & lifestyle management.
Propaganda aside. Everyone gets to choose how they live their lives. Almost everyone has an ancestor who risked his or her life just by coming to this country.
Mr Jennings was an educated man who certainly understood the risks involved and made a decision. That decision, was certainly within his rights to make.
When did quantity of life become more valuable than quality. 67 years as Peter Jennings beats 74 years of clean and healthy living any day of the week.
5 - dietdoc
Nancy writes: "until it comes home to one of "them", and then they're stunned, outraged, indignant, sad, etc."
Reply: Remember all the special reports when the news guy [and I sadly admit I forget the name] died during the early days of the Iraq War? And, not of war wounds, but of a pulmonary embolus? The separation was clear: hundreds of soldiers dying and leaving frends and family; one newscaster dies and the news world stops and takes prominent notice. Hour-long specials are presented. Interviews with the widow and coworkers in prime time. While the grunts, anonymously, keep dying, even today. No less tragic, but much less noticed.
You're quite correct: the news people - and it's admittedly true of most professions - treat the loss of one of their own with special reverence. They do have control of the airways.
Cheers,
Ron
6 - Matthew T. Sussman
dietdoc, I believe the man you're trying to remember is Peter Bloom. From what I recall, there wasn't an abundance of coverage of his death and generally they left their families alone. (Now if only they could do that when it's someone other dead soldier's family ...)
Also freelance journo Steven Vincent was abducted and shot in Basra not too long ago. This, too, was pretty much under the radar.
But it's gonna happen that they'll bring more attention to their own (see: Jim Carruthers). We all do that. But that doesn't always make it right.
7 - bhw
dietdoc, I believe the man you're trying to remember is Peter Bloom.
Or was it Michael Kelly, of the Atlantic Monthly?
8 - Matthew T. Sussman
Could be.
Which reminds me, he was Stephen Glass's former editor, portrayed by Hank Azaria in "Shattered Glass." Go see that if you haven't.
9 - Natalie Davis
Actually, it was NBC's David Bloom.
10 - bhw
You're right, Natalie! I guess it couldn't have been all that over-covered in the press if it took us 3 tries to get the name right.
11 - Natalie Davis
Heh.
12 - WTF
Not everyone who smokes gets "lung cancer"
I have a friend who NEVER smoked, NEVER drank, NEVER ate fried food, was a strict vegetarian... the whole nine yards. I knew this fellow for 30 years.
Died of LUNG, PANCREAS, LIVER and STOMACH cancer.
Probably agent orange related.
Peter Jennings smoked, it does increase the risk. But, so does genetics, Predisposition, exposure etc...
By the way my friends mother died of Pancreatic cancer in her 70's... Rex was only 59.
Cancer is a ravaging devil, which eats your ass up! And kills very painfully. Give to Cancer research. It's a terrible malady. I've seen several people in my lifetime go down with cancer and it is absolutely the most terrible way to go.
Insert Euthenasia discussion here....
13 - Phyllis
I feel I need to respond to the writter Jonathan Pinard who states that "67 years as Peter Jennings beats 74 years of clean and healthy living any day of the week." What Mr. Pinard seems to be forgetting, is that Mr. Jennings still could have been "Peter Jennings" without the risks of smoking. Mr. Pinard is presuming that if one does not smoke we are all living intolerable worthless lives, and that by smoking life is worth living as short as it may be. Obviously, the thought process of an addict. Smoking is an addiction, just as any other, and I feel sorry for Mr. Pinard and his misguided attempt to justify smoking as a reason to shorten one's precious life.
14 - Tina Holey
i don't like people smoking
15 - tommyd
Why are cigarettes still legally on sale in most countries throughout the world? They are sure-fire killers but they're not banned. Doesn't make sense. Other drugs or products that are deemed unsafe are typically and immediately pulled off shelves when they're proven usafe or potenially fatal.
I dunno, something's not right.