Barack Obama does not hate America, and Hillary Clinton is not a blood-sucking vampire, but who could tell? If a Republican wins the election in November, I will be first in line to read an exhaustive account of the media's shaping of this Democratic contest. In recent weeks, I've been astounded by the media's lack of substantive coverage and abundance of damaging or foundation-less stories. After writers got tired of reporting on actual issues, they decided to bite the bullet and write something a little juicier. And who can blame them, when our two candidates are among the best in recent memory, and have similar views on so many issues. There must be mud to be raked! Of course, I'm not asking for papers to throw a propaganda party. I know that it is not the job of the press to prop up candidates, and they should always publish a worthy story, no matter how damaging. But what I've seen here is an increasingly downward spiral in the quality of stories we've been getting since the early primaries in February. Since then, the information that is so desperately needed has been unavailable to the average voter. Two respectable candidates are facing undue criticism, while people still have no clue about John McCain's stance on abortion, or, well, much of anything really.
I, like every other human being with an independently functioning brain, am exhausted by the ridiculous claims made against Sen. Obama during the Jeremiah Wright controversy. And on more than one occasion, have been offended and shocked by articles written about Sen. Clinton (If someone could explain to me the newsworthiness of this article, I'll buy you dinner and give you sex coupons.) Also, it would also be nice if more writers could stop basing stories on relatively meaningless public opinion polls and explain the somewhat Biblical miracle it would take for Clinton to win the nomination. Or maybe more people could tell the whole story about Obama's stance on Iraq.
The fact is, that in the past couple of months, the media have lost their collective mind and if you ask me, they might as well check into Promises. I hear roller-blading with vapid de-toxing celebs can do a lot to clear one's head.
Also, if I read another article about how race has factored into this contest, I am going to start circulating rumors that Hills got a sex change, just to give one-note political pundits something new to run off at the mouth about. Obama's campaign was supposed to be about transcending race, but instead it has become defined by it. Clinton's campaign was initially defined by her years in the Senate and political activism, but that all has been used, often unfairly, against her at every single turn. If I had been around for as short a time as Obama, I too would be trying to turn "Washington as we know it" on its head (sorry, Barack. You're hot.).
As we gallop toward November, and Clinton hopefully makes a quick (and long overdue) exit, I extend a plea to the news media. Unless you have some wonderfully enlightening commentary on race, you are absolutely forbidden to write about it. Also, please resist the urge to create unnecessary political scandals, but if you must, do not continue to shove them down our throats long after they've gone stale. You know what would make for an interesting story? Carbon date John McCain. But that can go on A14. If you are incapable of writing decent stories on real issues, I'm even OK with putting the Dem. race on the back burner until something significant happens, if it means better stories. Maybe it will make room for more coverage of the food crisis, or I don't know, the off-the-cuff bombing of Somalia,.
No comments:
Post a Comment