Attacking the media
As a member of something referred to as "the media," I'm used to being used as a tool in political campaigns. The term "media" has joined "liberal," "trial lawyer" and, lately, "Muslim" as weapons, not words with meaning.
So, this strategy to plant the idea that we the media are on "a mission to destroy" Gov. Palin isn't unexpected. Nor is Palin's comment last night much more than evidence that she understands the playbook of American politics...Republican politics, according to Post media writer Howard Kurtz.
From what I read from mainstream coverage -- not counting the recently celebrated National Enquirer -- Kurtz nails it: But most journalists weren't so much biased against Palin as skeptical that she had the experience to step in as commander-in-chief, the standard that McCain himself had repeatedly touted.
Actually, much of what I've read and seen has been positive overall, attempting to explain how an unknown governor got to this position, reviewing her past and outlining her status as an outsider. The reviews on morning news shows give her top marks for her speech last night. Because she is such an unknown, her record, her positions, her votes, her statements, and, yes, her missteps will be news for awhile because most of the country knows so little about her.
That will put the media in the position we are in right now.
Steve Yelvington has a nice piece on the rock-solid American right of freedom of speech and of the press. Consequently, I won't spend time writing about American values here.
I wonder, though, how long the strategy of attacking the media will be effective when everyone is the media? With YouTube and blogs, it's not far off.
Comments (12)
To report abuse of the comment feature on this site, please use the feedback form at the bottom of any page.
It's a well deserved moniker since, for the most part,, the media has evolved from being adversarial to government to being it's cheerleader and advocate.
The industry brought it upon itself.
Posted on September 4, 2008 10:52 AM
I spent two hours yesterday watching MSNBC, they knocked Palin on everything from her hair, her children, no experience, had a phony accent., her speech was written by some else, she used a teleprompter, she breast feed her baby. The one I like best however, she had five children and did not have time to be VP. Is the same wacko liberal press, that praises Pelosi too death, guess what she has five children. I do not agree much with your lest wing liberal paper, however put me on recorded as being opposed to water boarding, make them watch MSNBC. Talking about experience she has more than Kane, did not see a outcry against him.
Posted on September 5, 2008 6:32 AM
Got to echo Anon above. When you (the N&R) do stuff like secretly kick into Terry Grier's slush-funded salery augmentation, at the same time your readers are expecting you to evaluate his actions objectively, people can possibly become cynical, and we wouldn't want that.
Posted on September 5, 2008 11:49 AM
It's a secret to me, too, skeet. I don't even know that what you say is true. But given that we don't know it, I'm not sure how that would influence our coverage.
Posted on September 5, 2008 12:19 PM
Perhaps your controller could shed some light.
Posted on September 5, 2008 1:50 PM
So John, you don't think that this putative "bribe" to keep Terry Grier in the community would induce a reasonable person to have objectivity concerns about any subsequent coverage regarding The Terrence in the N&R?
Okaaaay.
You're right. Just another day in Johnnyland.
Posted on September 5, 2008 2:13 PM
Well, I will agree with you on one thing, skeet. We certainly don't live on the same planet.
Posted on September 5, 2008 2:41 PM
Any progress on the N&R contribution to the Grier Appreciation Fund? Yea or Neigh?
Posted on September 5, 2008 2:48 PM
Like many corporations, the N&R donates hundreds of thousands of dollars to non-profits every year. The news department doesn't know what groups so that we don't have a conflict, not that I have ever been told to cover or not to cover some group by a corporate type.
Posted on September 5, 2008 3:37 PM
So Grier is a non profit? Hmmm... I imagine Terry is sitting at the Nineteenth Hole at Torrey Pines, a glass of Chivas in his hand, laughing his butt off, if he could hear that.
Posted on September 5, 2008 4:30 PM
You do have a vivid imagination. The point I was making was that I don't know what the N&R corporation contributes to. You say it contributed to this whatever you say it contributed to, without citing a source, of course.
Doesn't matter. If we don't know what organizations our corporate fathers give to and they don't tell us what or how to cover said organizations, what's your beef?
Posted on September 5, 2008 5:00 PM
I was hoping you would be the source.
Like you say, I have a vivid imagination.
Posted on September 5, 2008 5:51 PM