Dec 19, 2013 2 min read

What makes a big news story? It’s almost always an unusual or surprising event of great importance or interest to a vast number of people. But sometimes these criteria are ignored, objective judgment goes out the window and the media pounce upon a story of little importance or interest in their race to be the first to reveal the latest details.

Such was the case earlier this week when television and radio programs were interrupted by bulletins of explosives planted at Harvard University in Cambridge, Mass. The networks were alerted by traffic on social media like Facebook and Twitter and reacted quickly to avoid being excluded from the feeding frenzy.

There were no bombs found, and a few hours after the threat was received, students were permitted to return to the dormitory and three classroom buildings that had been searched. Activities at scores of high schools and colleges are disrupted every day by such threats, so what made this one so different? Why, even a day later, was the story plastered over the front pages of newspapers all over the country, including this one?

Newspaper editors may have felt obligated to explain what all the hysteria the previous day was about, but they also might have been reluctant to appear to be unaware, unconnected and unable to join the big sharks in the media free-for-all.

The University of Pittsburgh went through a long series of highly disruptive bomb threats in 2012, and this never made national news. Pitt is not Harvard, after all. For the media moguls of the East and West coasts, it is in “flyover” country, and it’s not where the wealthiest and most affluent send their children.

It seems the media – all of them – are not immune to flatulence of the brain.