Posted by: McQ on Monday, October 27, 2008 I don't think there's any question about this, even to partisan observers, but Juan Williams says it anyway: If you were going to events during the primaries, what you saw was that the executive editors and the top people at the networks were all rushing to Obama events, bringing their children, celebrating it, saying they were, there's this part of history. I think they plugged into the Obama narrative in a way that they said, “you know what, out with the past.” And they've been very critical of President Bush and Senator McCain, as an extension of Bush, playing into the Obama campaign theme. I don't think there's any question about this. The American people are smart, they can see this. That's why Obama's on every magazine cover — I've spend too much time in airports, you walk through there, it's like you're walking through an Obama campaign event. So, there's no question in my mind the media has been more supportive of Senator Obama.Yet, many of the more respected polls show us, Obama has yet to close the deal despite all of the help. So while William's gives us a statement of the obvious above, it was what he said next I found most interesting: But if you ask me, you know, so what does this indicate? Has this shifted, is that the reason for this race going as it has? No it's not. I think people understand the drama of what Senator Obama represents and, in some ways, I think, the McCain campaign has not been sufficiently smart in maneuvering themselves to present their candidate and what he has done and his story, his heroism, his willingness to sacrifice, I don't think they've done a very good job of advertising it.The McCain campaign has not had a consistent message. It has lurched from theme to theme in a fairly disorganized fashion. But it can't agree it hasn't pushed McCain's bio and sacrifice. If you don't know them, you're simply not paying attention. The unfortunate fact is, in the face of what Williams identifies as the "drama of what Senator Obama represents", all of the McCain background just isn't resonating as it might in some other election. The "historic" aspect of this election - the possible election of a black man to the highest office in the land - brings with it a certain elements that trump what may be the strengths of an opposing candidate's resume in any other "normal" election. How else do you explain the willingness to ignore the fact that Obama hasn't really done anything? How else do you explain the willingness to pretend he has answers to the economic problems we face (when it seems clear his ideas will most likely exacerbate them)? How else do you explain the willingness to suspend disbelief that sitting in a radical church for 20 years didn't effect him one bit? With the aiding and abetting of a media that sees this "historical" event from the perspective of a reformer vs. a reporter, it hasn't been at all difficult. The majority of the media chose sides early in this contest. And the side they chose was that of the Democrats. Whether it was Obama (who quickly developed into their 1st choice) or Hillary (acceptable but not as much as Obama) they had "history" in the making. After years of pillorying Bush and the Republicans, many in the media decided that not only was a complete change necessary (for which they decided to work) but a historic change - a sea change. Obama, a black man with flowery rhetoric was that person. A complete change from the inarticulate Bush and whose election would assuage much of the white guilt the liberal media has felt for decades, they simply couldn't help themselves. Red flags (no pun intended)? Forget about it. The juggernaut has been launched and there is no turning back. Inconvenient and alarming facts notwithstanding, nothing will see them deviate from their support for this choice. October surprise? I'm beginning to think that even if he were caught a dead girl and live boy in bed, the media would somehow find a way to blame it on Bush and exonerate Obama. Shorter point - the media has been shameless in its support of one candidate over the other and that is not only shameful, but has further eroded what little public credibility they enjoyed. I wonder if they have the capability to internally assess what they've done to their reputation and credibility and to take actions to repair it? My guess is they don't. And I'd further guess that should Obama become president, you'll see the media scrambling to rationalize and excuse every mistake and misstep Obama makes. They won't be able to help themselves, at least initially. It won't be until it is so obvious it can't be ignored (like the turnaround in Iraq) that they will actually begin to report on Obama failures. When they do, expect it to be as vicious as anything you've ever seen or read from them - because that's the only way they'll see open to them to recover from their fawning and misleading coverage of Obama in the past. For the most part I think the public understands what's happened in this election cycle as it pertains to the media. Of course those backing Obama are thankful (thankful in a "never look a gift horse in the mouth" sort of way). Those that don't are disgusted. When (and if) the media turns on Obama it is going to be ugly. Bloggers like myself can't wait because it is going to be a target rich environment. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| TrackBacks | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Return to Main Blog Page | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Comments For This Post | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Previous Comments to this Post |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Add Your Comment | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
| Vicious Capitalism |
Buy Dale's Book!
|
