Editorial May 15, 1995 Issue

Your response to the Simpson trial—why it counts

Mary Metzner Trammell

The enormity of public response to the double murder trial of Orenthal James (O.J.) Simpson—currently playing itself out in a Los Angeles courtroom filled with spectators and live-television-coverage paraphernalia—has shocked even media experts. As columnist with The New Times put it, "Not since the kidnapping of the Lindbergh baby has a crime so captivated the American imagination" (Kenneth B. Noble, January 23, 1995).

For the cable channels offering gavel-to-gavel coverage of the trial, "the national O.J. Simpson obsession" (that's how a Boston Globe writer described it) has meant a ratings "bonanza." But even some of the cable executives have somber moments of wondering why there's such public fascination with the details of a private tragedy. Maybe they feel their success is too easy, too based on the loss and pain of a few people. Ed Turner, executive vice-president of Cable News Network (CNN), said recently that the network can look with pride at its live coverage explain, "when you take a camera and put it in a courtroom and everybody watches, it's depressing" (Frederic M. Biddle, The Boston Globe, March 2, 1995).

Viewers themselves express a range of responses to the courtroom drama being delivered—complete with computer graphics and theme music—to their living rooms. Many people, of course, feel saddened. Other people, like the grandmotherly woman I sat next to on a plane recently, devour every new twist in the case with relish. After she flipped through the in-flight magazine a few minutes, she told me in disgust, "There's not a thing in there about O. J. Simpson!"

Send a comment to the editors

We'd love to hear from you!

Easily submit your testimonies, articles, and poems online.

Submit

Your response to the Simpson trial—why it counts

We'd love to hear from you!

Sign up for unlimited access