From the category archives:

Press

When 4 Equals 3

by Doug on June 3, 2009

in Politics,Press

The press in the U.S. has long been referred to as the fourth branch of government, meaning that although without any vested powers constitutionally (other than freedom) it carried a duty to provide a check on government’s power and actions by examining and reporting to the citizenry just what government was seeking and doing in any given matter. The media has of course always cherished and fostered this perception, as it serves to improve their standing and heighten their perceived importance in society.

Many conservatives have long believed that the press was imbalanced in their willingness and/or ability to provide the same sort of critiques of liberals and conservatives in government due to the overwhelming numbers of liberals working in reporting and editorial positions in the major news outlets – the flagships of news media, if you will.

Watching the 2008 presidential election campaign did nothing to lessen this impression among conservatives, as they watched a very young and exceptionally inexperienced candidate float through the usually stormy campaign waters with scarcely any critical examination of glaring incongruities in his positions. The press fawned over candidate Obama as though he were the favorite son.

The adoring crowd of media has continued their adoration into the Obama presidency, says Robert J. Samuelson in a Newsweek piece. A study by the Pew Research Center finds that Obama has received a much greater proportion of favorable coverage of both he and his initiatives than either Clinton or Bush did during the comparable period of their administrations. It seems it’s all love, all the time for the NY/DC journalist crowd when it comes to Obama. Says Samuelson:

The Obama infatuation is a great unreported story of our time. Has any recent president basked in so much favorable media coverage? Well, maybe John Kennedy for a moment, but no president since. On the whole, this is not healthy for America.

Our political system works best when a president faces checks on his power. But the main checks on Obama are modest. They come from congressional Democrats, who largely share his goals if not always his means. The leaderless and confused Republicans don’t provide effective opposition. And the press—on domestic, if not foreign, policy—has so far largely abdicated its role as skeptical observer.

Yes, the media has essentially abdicated their assumed role as watchdogs-in-chief now that their beloved Obama is in the White House. The “fourth branch” has become the public relations office of the Executive Branch. If you’re waiting for the NY Times to dig in and find out what it is that is creating the awful stench of corruption coming from Obama’s friends at ACORN, you’ll have to wait. They spiked at the last minute that story at the last minute in the weeks before the election, leaving the reporter who had developed the sources and worked the story exasperated, and have not come back to it. Or if you’re waiting for Meet the Press to seriously examine whether Obama’s nominee for the opening seat on the Supreme Court is in reality a racist, a case which can easily be made based on her own statements as a Federal judge, you had better pack a lunch – and a midnight snack. In short, until and unless Obama somehow crosses his pals in the media, there’s going to have to be a dead body on the White House lawn before the mainstream press is going to do anything resembling investigative journalism where the current administration is concerned, and I’m thinking that even that corpse wouldn’t make it a lock.

{ 0 comments }

The Over-Hyped Recession

by Doug on March 16, 2009

in Economics,Politics,Press

It’s hopefully not a new idea to you that news organizations are prone to present just about any story as “THE MOST SHOCKING, BIGGEST, UNPRECEDENTED, MUST-SEE MUNDANE STORY WE’VE EVER REPORTED!!!!!” Why? They are deathly afraid you will change the channel when they cut to commercial, or walk past the newsstand without buying that paper, or allow your eyes to scan right past the link to their site and never consume the ads they are selling. Yes, IT’S A BUSINESS! They only report news because they so desperately  need your eyeballs in order to make a profit selling advertising around their reporting.

This is why, over the last six months, you’ve seen so many headlines in this vein: “Most Americans Ever Unemployed.” What’s wrong with that headline? Just this: The fact is that as a percentage of the workforce, unemployment during the current recession is not as great as it has been even in the last 30-40 years, let alone during the Great Depression (not even close). But instead of stating that in the headline, it will say, “More Americans Out Of Work Than During Great Depression.” Guess what? There are many millions more people in the U.S. today than during the time of the Great Depression, so the fact that there are more Americans unemployed today than there were then is more of a curiosity than an indicator of the severity of the current economic downturn.

Headlines, though, are written to grab attention, not present the facts that are needed to properly place a story in historical context.

The media are not alone in this. Political candidates (or, I should say, candidates who are not incumbents) also work to give the impression that times are unprecedentedly hard during their campaign. While he was running for office, Pres. Obama was absolutely following this predictable playbook. As the media has the same motivation, they were happy to repeat the Obama mantra that this was the worst economy in 50 years. (I seem to recall that Bill Clinton’s campaign in 1992 had the exact same “worst economy in 50 years” mantra. The result of focus-group testing of the most effective time comparison, probably.) A candidate who can instill fear in voters and convince them that he or she is the panacea to the scenario which the voters should fear, has a good chance of winning those votes. Obama carried this tactic right into his term in the White House, using constantly-stoked fear of economic collapse as political cover to win passage of the enormous stimulus bill, full of unpopular initiatives which would be very unlikely to be voted into law were they debated on their own merits. This was one of the most cowardly legislative tactics I’ve ever seen.

Kirk Petersen cites data that supports this idea in his blog post today. Give it a read, and be cognizant of such tactics when you are consuming news reporting, whether it be on television, in print, or online.

{ 1 comment }