Election2008 Home
Anyone who does not meet the corporate requirements of toadyism and obesiance is soon crowded out or ignored to death.
I had thought,earlier in this cycle,that the candidates would connect with their supporters online and foreswear the media conglomerates all the funds it takes to buy ads on TV and radio,thus being less beholden to big contributers.I was wrong.
Elizabeth Edwards On The Media
|
April 28, 2008 -- Posted by Catherine Morgan
Elizabeth Edwards had a great op-ed in The New York Times on Sunday, Bowling 1, Health Care 0. She points out how the media is cheating the American people of learning the important facts about candidates and issues. Voters deserve to know what the media is leaving out of their coverage, and how what they don't say can actually manipulate or democracy. Here are a few excerpts from her op-ed... The problem today unfortunately is that voters who take their responsibility to be informed seriously enough to search out information about the candidates are finding it harder and harder to do so, particularly if they do not have access to the Internet. Did you, for example, ever know a single fact about Joe Biden's health care plan? Anything at all? But let me guess, you know Barack Obama's bowling score. We are choosing a president, the next leader of the free world. We are not buying soap, and we are not choosing a court clerk with primarily administrative duties. What's more, the news media cut candidates like Joe Biden out of the process even before they got started. Just to be clear: I'm not talking about my husband. I'm referring to other worthy Democratic contenders. Few people even had the chance to find out about Joe Biden's health care plan before he was literally forced from the race by the news blackout that depressed his poll numbers, which in turn depressed his fund-raising. And it's not as if people didn't want this information. In focus groups that I attended or followed after debates, Joe Biden would regularly be the object of praise and interest: "I want to know more about Senator Biden," participants would say. But it was not to be. Indeed, the Biden campaign was covered more for its missteps than anything else. Chris Dodd, also a serious candidate with a distinguished record, received much the same treatment. I suspect that there was more coverage of the burglary at his campaign office in Hartford than of any other single event during his run other than his entering and leaving the campaign. Who is responsible for the veil of silence over Senator Biden? Or Senator Dodd? Or Gov. Tom Vilsack? Or Senator Sam Brownback on the Republican side? The decision was probably made by the same people who decided that Fred Thompson was a serious candidate. Articles purporting to be news spent thousands upon thousands of words contemplating whether he would enter the race, to the point that before he even entered, he was running second in the national polls for the Republican nomination. Second place! And he had not done or said anything that would allow anyone to conclude he was a serious candidate. . . . News is different from other programming on television or other content in print. It is essential to an informed electorate. And an informed electorate is essential to freedom itself. But as long as corporations to which news gathering is not the primary source of income or expertise get to decide what information about the candidates "sells," we are not functioning as well as we could if we had the engaged, skeptical press we deserve. And the future of news is not bright. Indeed, we've heard that CBS may cut its news division, and media consolidation is leading to one-size-fits-all journalism. The state of political campaigning is no better: without a press to push them, candidates whose proposals are not workable avoid the tough questions. All of this leaves voters uncertain about what approach makes the most sense for them. Worse still, it gives us permission to ignore issues and concentrate on things that don't matter. . . . If voters want a vibrant, vigorous press, apparently we will have to demand it. Not by screaming out our windows as in the movie "Network" but by talking calmly, repeatedly, constantly in the ears of those in whom we have entrusted this enormous responsibility. Do your job, so we can "as voters" do ours. I highly recommend you read this full op-ed by Elizabeth Edwards, it's an excellent piece. What other bloggers are saying... PunditMom Silicon Valley Moms Blog TruthDig Taylor Marsh The Democratic Daily What do you think about this? Do you think that we "the people" have the power to force the media to report on the real issues, and not just the issues that get the best ratings? What will it take? |
Joan G.
Wednesday April 30, 2008, 5:32 AM
Thank you, Elizabeth Edwards. I respect you more than ever now, not only for defending my favorite, Joe Biden, but for having the guts to speak out about the media and their deliberate culling of the candidate field by ignoring many worthy candidates.
Robert D.
Tuesday April 29, 2008, 7:34 PM
Am I seeing things upside down, like the free trade between the US and Mexico. Everyone is going hysterical over the job losses to Mexico. When was the last time you bought anything made in Mexico? Our jobs are going, but not to the Latino
countries; they are going to Asia(made in: China, Japan, Korea,and so on)and as far as I know, we have no free trade agreement with those countries.
countries; they are going to Asia(made in: China, Japan, Korea,and so on)and as far as I know, we have no free trade agreement with those countries.
Claudia Rice
Tuesday April 29, 2008, 5:38 PM
I'm glad someone is finally saying it out loud: the media culled the candidates!
Wednesday April 30, 2008, 10:23 AM
I was a Kucinich supporter and it grieved me the way media blacked him out of participating in debates even when he was in third place standing and instead allowed the fourth place Richardson in the debate .I think all candidates should be allowed to debate with equal time .This is how we get to know our candidates and what they stand for .These candidates were eliminated by the media so early on it never gave any of them the chance to be heard.
It also bothers me greatly that today in America unless you can come up with millions of dollars you really can't campaign for long and your not seen by your own party as a serious contender .
I am not saying that all wealthy people aren't capable of understand what its like to be poor .What I am saying is that the cost to run for office is so great these days that the average person with intelligence enough to become president could never become president because of the amount of funds that is required to run a campaign .I think this should change !