Wednesday, January 16, 2008

Nevada Debate: When Media Zombies Attack!

Crossposted from Left Toon Lane, Bilerico Project & My Left Wing

click to enlarge
What a miserable debate last night. The worst of the campaign season by far. This one started off with what looked like a a group hug in the principal's office over race relations and it slid downhill after that.

The candidates aren't at fault here, it is the mainstream media. The spoon-fed, pre-programmed "gotcha" drip of questions did not serve the people of Nevada or We The People for that matter. The whole shindig seemed to be designed to give each candidate an opportunity to bitch slap their opponents. Definitely not something worthy of Jefferson's Virginia Statehouse.

The bright spot was the heckler. The heckler also had the most poignant statement - race baiting which is what this debate was all about. A purposeful attempt by Russert and the gang to start a class/race war among the candidates, thankfully they did not bite.

I am left wondering when We The People will bite back... bite the mainstream media?

BTW, today's strip is dedicated to Dot. You can't see her right now. She is fighting the good fight, deep down in the trench.


Carl said...

Why are people so incapable of focusing on the salient challenges of our time and demanding answers from the declared candidates about why their ideas are best?

It's really pretty simple: a journalist is "trained" *koffkoff* to lead with the most important fact.

That means writing about the horse race becomes the easiest fact to make most important.

When Obama won Iowa, no one mentioned that his win, while convincing, wasn't the loss for Clinton that it was for Edwards. Why? Because Clinton had pretty much ceded Iowa in her strategy discussions, finally deciding that she had to show up for it, at least.

Edwards, on the other hand, HAD to win Iowa, or at least place a convincing second.

That story doesn't write itself easily, even if you're writing a strategy piece. It's much better to take a look around, realize all your pundit friends had this as a two horse race from the beginning, and write to the dumber common denominator.

Nevermind issues. Those don't get talked about because, well, who do you bump up to the lead paragraphs in the discussion? Sure, they make great Sunday magazine dissections, with the charts and the head-to-head summaries, but the story itself requires a lot more thought, a lot more investigation and a lot more careful writing.

And like everyone else, journalists only want to do the minimum daily required work.