MTV turns 25 this week, and I could not care less.
Anniversary stories are staples of journalism, where media outlets tend to commemorate events in 5-year increments. But really, what is there to say about MTV at 25 that wasn't said about MTV at 20? The Courant ran a story in 2001 with the headline, "Music MIA on MTV: The Music Channel is Turning 20, But The Music is Harder to Find." That about sums up MTV at 25, too.
I felt the same way in December about the 25th anniversary of the murder of John Lennon.
Besides mentioning the anniversary in a review of U2's concert that night in Hartford, I didn't write anything about Lennon's death, and there was some subtle disapproval in the newsroom over that. But Lennon's legacy hasn't changed any since the 20th anniversary. His songs are still great, he was still half of one of the best songwriting teams ever, he's still an icon for pop music fans everywhere, it's still a shame he was gunned down at such a young age. Must we reaffirm those things every five years? To what end?
There are exceptions to my anti-anniversary stance. This year marks the fifth anniversary of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, for example, and it seems to me there's plenty to discuss five years later. But MTV's birthday? Meh. Surely there are more important things to cover.
On the other hand, Hank Stuever wrote this in today's Washington Post, and it's as good an essay on the topic as you could hope to read. (Thanks, Jason, for the link.)
Comments