Celebrity death overload generates harsh backlash

Over the course of a week, the world lost five prominent and very talented celebrities.

Beginning last Tuesday, late night television paid fitting tribute to Ed McMahon, age 86, and readied writers for the expected passing of Farrah Fawcett, age 62. Ironically, following morbid coverage leading into her final days, news of Fawcett’s death quickly succumbed to shocking reports of Michael Jackson’s collapse and sudden passing at age 50. Almost a week later, Jackson-related news coverage continues unabated.

Aftershocks of Billy Mays, dead at age 50, and Gale Storm, dead at age 87, quietly followed. Somewhere, someplace, lesser-known personalities must have bitten the dust but likely didn’t rate high enough to attract national attention.

Probably just as well given the glut of demise. How much more gloom and doom can celebrity-philes handle?

What’s so interesting about the fallout of mass celebrity loss is not whether gossip lovers will tune out, but rather, whether news snobs can suffer the indignities of near 24/7 celebrity news coverage without throwing a collective hissy fit. One author is so disgusted over “obsessive retrospectives” diminishing news coverage of legislation initiatives and repressive foreign regimes he’s cracking bad Jimmy Carter jokes. Another expresses amazement at those who “can rattle off bits of biographical fact and gossip about famous singers, television personalities and movie stars, as if they were relatives or members of their high school class.”

Is there something off-balance about an affinity for pop culture?

Personally, I’m grateful for safe havens where birds of a feather can flock together. Don’t ruffle my nest and I won’t ruffle yours. To each their own poison.

And this too shall pass.