Media consumers who tuned in to Wednesday night's television broadcast news for a quick fix of the day's events and to find out whether our world powers were poised for World War III or not, had some waiting to do.
The lead story from coast to coast, was the Iowa birth of septuplets.
Wow. Some real news there. Some of us were sweating over war ships moving into position in the Persian Gulf. We were not in the mood for a sugar- coated marathon of bouncing babies.
We question the news value of such events, much less the delivery (pun intended). While newspaper readers could "wade through the babies" and get to the real news, broadcast viewers could in no way fast forward past the babies.
And while this type of pregnancy raises many profound scientific, ethical and environmental issues, the media mantra was dished up with cheer and optimism. The hospital had provided satellite broadcast of the blessed event, and press releases had landed even in our university newsroom.
Such unatural multiple births are becoming common-place as more couples have come to rely on fertility drugs in recent years.
The drugs cause a large number of eggs to be released, the theory being that the odds are better of achieving a viable embryo. However, the side effect is an increase of unusually high multiple pregnancies that are neither natural nor miraculous.
And, devoting so much air time and print to a health issue of limited scope, when the United States was on the brink of armed confrontation in the Middle East, is unconscionable for those in the business of providing Americans with the real news that may impact their lives forever.
The potential of armed conflict with Sadaam Hussein's government in Iraq has a direct effect on our lives, from the gasoline we put in our engines to the lives of our love ones who may be called upon for combat.
We believe the media, especially broadcasters, must put the real issues and real news up front. Scandalous trials and unusual baby births belong on a less prominent inch of tape or newsprint.