Remember when the Amazon rainforest was on fire? Or is that complete old news now? How could the public forget about something so detrimental? Easily. The news cycle is a vicious one. Certain stories can possibly to surpass the typical one-week cycle of relevance, but not many. Is there anyone to blame? Not technically.
The breaking news of the fires blazing throughout the Amazon rainforest covered headlines for days, and then slowly lose popularity. It is mind blowing how such a devastating occurrence can still fall victim to the news cycle. As someone who hopes to be a journalist, it can be explained in the sense of media and the public. The public wants things to be fresh and new every day, and the media will give the public what they want, even if it means discarding topics that are very important, and very serious.
In a class of mine recently, the professor searched "Epstein" on YouTube, trying to prove his point that the case covering Jefferey Epstein has lost much if not all coverage. My professor was correct. A disgraceful case filled to the brim with abuse and scandal has been lost into the never-ending black hole of lost headlines. Frankly, that is not a news story I would enjoy hearing about daily, but the point is that a story that covered every single headlines until the suspect's death had completely disappeared after a few weeks. The news cycle keeps things moving, that is for sure.
It reminds me of high school drama. Something happens that feels like the end of the world and everyone hears about it, until it vanishes. In a few days or so it becomes a distant memory and the only thing your peers are concerned with is if there is pizza in the cafeteria today. I believe the students play the public on a very minuscule scale, and the gossip plays the breaking stories, good, bad, or shocking.
