Media and Politics
One thing that seems certain from the primary coverage to date (just prior to Super Tuesday) is that the influence of the media has been increasing and becoming more supportive of the Democrat candidates.
Media includes TV and Cable networks and newspapers plus the consultants, commentators, pollsters and pundits who follow (and profit from) the political scene by providing content and commentary.
The media provides voice (and cover) for the positions, leaks and “opposition research” generated by political campaigns, especially campaigns that they favor.
Continual (24/7) coverage on cable news increases demand for stories and competition to be “first on the air” results in stories being broadcast (or printed) with less time or effort spent checking on the accuracy of the story, or the particular bias of the source providing the story.
As a result, groups or individuals with an agenda can easily influence the news and the voters.
“Carville and Begalla will join the Clinton campaign as advisors, perhaps as early as tomorrow morning!”
Just prior to the New Hampshire primary, news outlets were presenting polls predicting a double-digit victory for Senator Obama over Senator Clinton. Network and cable channels predicted a “stunning” shift in sentiment toward Obama, and coverage of plans for a shake up of Clinton’s campaign staff.
If there was any critique of the methodology of the polls it was not obvious. The fact that polls can be constructed with questions worded to influence the results (push-polls, for example) wasn’t explored. It all got presented in a frenzy of “Obama-mania”.
Perhaps it would be overly cynical to ponder whether this frenzy might have been instigated to influence the New Hampshire primary by increasing turnout of Clinton supporters (to help keep Hillary from being ganged up upon by the “boys”) and simultaneously decreasing turnout of Obama supporters (who might feel less urgency to vote for him, thinking he already had a large lead).
Surely the poll results were an innocent error, certainly not a “dirty trick” nor anything related to the “politics of personal destruction”, and certainly nothing like the “innocent” comments by Clinton campaign staff about Senator Obama’s past drug use (and wondering whether he had sold drugs).
“The Straight Talk Express Rolls into New Hampshire”
You don’t have to wonder who the media supports in the Republican race.
Senator John McCain (Maverick, Straight Shooter, who personally redirected the Iraq war) is the Man.
Something is wrong when the New Hampshire Republican primary elects a candidate who is a favorite of Chris (“Let’s Play Hard-ball!”) Matthews on MSNBC, is endorsed by the New York Times and proudly co-sponsors legislation with Ted Kennedy. These are not people who admire (or aspire to promote) Republican and conservative principles!
It’s no secret that individuals, including reporters, have personal perspectives and viewpoints that shape their paradigm, their way of understanding the world. The issue is reporters reflecting their own biases when reporting events, confusing opinion with actual reporting.
Aside from talk radio, network and most cable broadcast media and many newspapers seem to favor liberals over conservatives and prefer Democrats. They have a different perspective depending on the candidate they’re commenting upon.
Senator McCain is described as “independent” and “authentic”; Governor Romney was “attacking” when he commented on the Senator’s legislative record.
Senator McCain’s record deserves comment, but the media isn’t spending much time on it.
Senator McCain’s sponsored the McCain-Feingold Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (limiting freedom of speech about candidates before elections), the McCain-Kennedy Secure America and Orderly Immigration Act (allowing illegal aliens to obtain permanent residency), and the McCain-Lieberman Climate Stewardship Act (establishing EPA regulation of greenhouse gases, with caps and trade).
His record includes votes against the Bush tax cuts and being investigated (in the Keating Five scandal) by a Senate Ethics Committee, which determined that he “used poor judgment” in accepting gifts (vacations, travel) from the owner of the Lincoln Savings & Loan business and then intervening with regulators on Lincoln’s behalf before it went bankrupt (costing taxpayers $2 billion).
Why would Chris Matthews and the New York Times prefer a particular Republican candidate?
Are they really rooting for McCain because he has the best chance to win against Clinton or Obama?
Does anyone believe that? More likely they think he has the least chance to win.
Perhaps it is because McCain’s positions are so consistent with Democrats on many issues.
If McCain is the nominee, the same media that currently admires him will be digging furiously into his record, and his wife’s, especially if it will help the Democrats.
As mentioned previously, we are selecting a person for the most powerful executive position in the world.
It doesn’t make it easier when you have to fact-check what you’re hearing and seeing on TV.
Ray Chadwick is the Chairman of the Bedford Republican Committee.