Pitts' Perspective

As I was reading the opinion section of the Austin American Statesman online the other day, I came across an article very relevant to our class. Leonard Pitts, frequent editorial writer, and Pulitzer Prize winner, shed light on the recent Youtube phenomenon and the proverbial quest for 15 minutes of fame that has ensued. This incident is a bit more serious than that of the British divorcee we discussed in class, but alas, here goes.

As Marcela also blogged about this week, a recent incident involving several 17 year-old girls beating one of their friends, has popped up on Youtube. The girls lured their friend to a house, beating her, while two boys kept watch. She takes blows to the head, barely covering herself, while the girls tell her to "make it good" because only 17 seconds of video remain. "Disgusting" as Pitts describes it, is that the girls show no remorse over the beating, only that they will miss cheerleading practice due to being incarcerated. Even more so is that the parents of the bullies defend their children, stating that the victim was "trash talking" online.

Pitts' article examines not just the act itself, but the startling motivation behind it- Youtube fame. Pitts worries that 15 minutes of internet fame may just have been the catalyst behind the brutality here. And sadly, I agree. What I most agree with, and appreciate, about his editorial, is that he worries about what "fame" actually represents in contemporary society. It used to be, he says, that you got famous because of a discernible amount of talent over others, an extraordinary quality. Those days are gone.

I know I've blogged about the "starmaking" quality of Youtube before. I stand by the fact that yes, some people use Youtube in a beneficial manner. We've all watched the same videos of little kids saying quirky things, and fashion commentators utilizing it to get media exposure. This is a different story. I should say that I'm amazed that people would stoop so low as to violently beat a friend of theirs (rendering her blind in one eye and deaf in one ear), but I'm not. Some people cannot filter things. They cannot differentiate between right and wrong, and when they see Youtube manufacturing notoriety, they take note.

Or, as Pitts more succinctly puts it, these are not smart girls:

"No, these are the video-besotted children of an era where only suckers can't find some way to become known. Fame is democratized now, no longer the exclusive province of the talented, the heroic or even the lucky, but rather a commodity accessible to anyone willing to seize it by any means necessary."

So, what do you think? Is this the downfall of society? Fame by any means necessary? Or is this a case, like that of the myspace girl who committed suicide, of tactless people in a tactless environment? Help me decide, because honestly, I just don't want to live with the fact that these girls did it because they thought we'd all have a laugh while bored at work.

As much as it pains me to use this as my example, here's the "O'Reilly Factor" coverage of the incident. It's all I could find, I promise.