It’s June 12, 1994, and millions of Americans are gathered around their televisions watching as OJ Simpson flees the police in a captivating 90-minute car chase across California freeways. The public is enthralled by the “trial of the century,” devouring every headline and newscast broadcasting Simpson’s infamous murder case. Yet, just across the Atlantic, an “invisible genocide” is unfolding. In Rwanda, hundreds of thousands of Tutsi civilians are being hacked to death with machetes and burned alive, herded by the hundreds into buildings set aflame.

While the courtroom drama in the US gripped the attention of millions, a far more terrifying reality was happening in Rwanda, one that received significantly less media attention. This disparity is just one example of the larger, recurring pattern of Western media prioritizing maximizing their clicks and views rather than genuine education and awareness, which often allows celebrity trials to overshadow harrowing political issues. Another explanation for the media coverage imbalance is that viewers will naturally gravitate towards scandal and entertainment over serious political issues.

OJ Simpson’s trial is a concrete example of this phenomenon. The murder trial of OJ Simpson for the killings of his ex-wife, Nicole Brown Simpson, and her friend, Ron Goldman, is perhaps one of the most infamous trials in history. Because of the courtroom’s transparency and open-press access, the trial quickly became a media sensation, capturing the attention of tens of millions of Americans.

Meanwhile, in Rwanda, a planned campaign of mass murders by approximately 200,000 Hutu civilians against the minority Tutsi population from April to July 1994 was unraveling. After about 100 days, more than 800,000 Tutsi and Hutu people were killed.

A graph by political scientist Dr. Steven Livingston, published in “The Media and the Rwanda Genocide,” shows the notable gap in media coverage between OJ’s drama and the Rwandan genocide in the nightly newscasts of ABC, CBS and NBC during the summer of 1994. It was not until late July that coverage of Rwanda began increasing. However, by then, the massacre had already taken place, and the media generally focused on the suffering of Hutu refugees in Zaire rather than the gruesome murders inflicted upon the Tutsi by the Hutu.

A more recent example of this occurring is the 2022 defamation trial between actress Amber Heard and her ex-husband, Johnny Depp, which took the internet by storm. By the end of the trial in June, the hashtag #JusticeForJohnnyDepp had amassed 20.4 billion views on TikTok and even prompted Netflix to create the “Depp v Heard” documentary.

At the same time, the Supreme Court was deliberating a decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, which would essentially overturn 50 years of precedent regarding the right to abortion in the US. In May 2022, a draft opinion by Justice Samuel Alito was released, leaking the Court’s motive to retain the Mississippi law (a 2018 law that outlawed abortions after 15 weeks), and overturn Planned Parenthood v. Casey (a 1992 case that reaffirmed the right to abortion under Roe, while states had control of certain restrictions) and Roe v. Wade.

Although the disparity in media coverage between the overturning of Roe v. Wade and the Depp v. Heard trial was not as extreme as that between the OJ Simpson trial and the Rwandan genocide, there was still a noticeable difference. Data by MediaCloud demonstrates how in early May, stories concerning Roe v. Wade outnumbered those of the Heard-Depp trial. However, after the news of the leaked draft subsided mid-May, attention shifted to Heard and Depp until Roe v. Wade coverage saw a substantial spike in late June, following the official overturning of abortion rights.

The media shift likely had real-world consequences. Despite the difference in the coverage not seeming to be too significant, the heavy media focus on the Heard-Depp trial from early May to mid-June may have taken attention away from the protests and activism against the reversal of abortion rights, especially during the period before any official rulings (when the public still had time to mobilize and make a difference).

So why do people continuously indulge in these celebrity trials instead of learning about issues that actually affect the world? A study by the American Psychological Association states that 56% of Americans agree that keeping up with the news causes them stress. While limiting news consumption for the sake of one’s mental well-being is understandable, there comes a point where avoiding current events becomes willful ignorance.

Another reason is the psychological appeal of celebrity trials. In “The Press on Trial,” Lloyd Chiasson Jr. suggests that these cases contain “all the elements of good fiction: conflict, suspense, rising and falling action, deception and surprise, heroes and villains.” Like reality television, celebrity trials serve up the perfect mix of glamour, vulnerability and scandal, making them difficult to ignore.

Ultimately, I believe that the key to combating this dynamic lies with viewers and the news outlets.

To break the vicious cycle of market-driven media companies catering to the demands of their audiences and ending up with tabloid journalism, we must consciously uncouple our news and entertainment channels. This way our news can remain focused on matters that truly impact us, while celebrity gossip can remain in the realm of entertainment.

On the other hand, the news companies themselves have to keep their journalistic integrity in-check. Regardless of the preferences of their audience, these companies have a moral duty to report on any crises or situations of importance, even if they aren’t the most sought after topics.

Only after both the consumers and suppliers of media actively decide to get rid of this unproductive pattern, will we begin to see change. But when is that change going to come? I guess the shiny new lawsuit between actors Justin Baldoni and Blake Lively, that is already making its mark on the list of notorious celebrity lawsuits, is the perfect chance for us to get a glimpse of how doomed media actually is.