Debate analysis: Media hungry! Media feed!


From the wooded wilderness in the shadow of the Mesabi Iron Range’s western ridge, I offer a brief commentary on the national political scene.

The progressive blogs are hammering last night’s ABC Democratic Presidential debate moderated by Charles Gibson and George Stephanopoulos (along with more objective media critics and journalism experts). I’m glad that I purposely avoided watching it because I feared the debate would go down this way. I have since read the transcripts and agree that the thing was a disaster. The first half was relegated to tough but largely trivial questions primarily focused against the frontrunner Barack Obama. Vast swaths of important issues were ignored, including the economy and health care. And yes, Obama’s performance was only so-so while Clinton was polished but unappealing in her zeal to join in the mud-fest. Basically, no one won, which is what is being repeated all over the Internet today.

I mean, really. “Do you believe Rev. Wright loves America as much as you, Sen. Obama?” and questions about why Obama doesn’t wear flag pins. That’s a Toby Keith song, not a debate.

Here’s my unique contribution to the day-after debate, however. A lot of people are arguing that this debate had an anti-Obama or pro-Hillary bias. And on the surface it could seem that way, but the truth is much more depressing. I have long contended that the national media is neither liberal nor conservative. The national media is a hulking, bloodthirsty animal focused on self-gratification and preservation. It will feed on any ideology so long as its checks keep cashing. Last night, ABC did everything it could to keep the Democratic nomination race A) alive and B) ugly — two things that will provide another good month of ratings and revenue for the national news media.

I watch “ABC World News” every night and “This Week” every Sunday morning. I basically like and respect Gibson and Stephanopoulos. But this was a very bad debate and spoke very poorly of political discourse in America today. The polls won’t move, the results won’t be affected, but everyone will feel just a little bit dirtier on the inside. Hooray for the Fourth Estate!

Comments

  1. I watch “ABC World News” every night and “This Week” every Sunday morning.

    And, as you acknowledge, that is the only thing that really matters to the media. The presidential selection process has devolved into a version of American Idol, complete with entertaining commentary. And its probably cheaper for them to produce.

    Complaining about this is like buying Playboy and complaining about its focus on sex and naked women. What did you expect?

  2. A valid point. As I said a few days ago, I watch television news to see what is being reported to Americans who don’t have the time or ability to dig through the Internet for information. And usually ABC is pretty even-keel, which is what made last night so disappointing. Same for “This Week” with a few exceptions.

    You can rest assured that I don’t plan on buying the adult diapers or stool softeners so often advertised on these programs. And you can forgot about Plavix. I just won’t buy it.

    I don’t know if I buy the Playboy simile, but kudos for going there.

  3. Anonymous says

    Hi Aaron,

    I wasn’t going to watch the debate last night but I was sucked in. I was very disappointed but not very surprised. I just cannot believe that this is what we call journalism. These people are at the national level and it makes me sick that this is what future journalists are looking to as mentors. I stopped watching the evening news years ago. My Mother and Father watched it every evening when I was a child (I am 35 now). I have pretty much resorted to the internet as my news source (sometimes MPR/NPR). I will watch Morning Joe in the morning to get a take on what the traditional media is deciding to make part of their dog and pony show. Other than that, I’ve found television to be a big game of how can we get the most viewers so we can pad our greedy pockets with the most money possible. I find they actually don’t really care about informing us. They want to “entertain” us.

    As far as liking and respecting Gibson, I also tended to feel the same way. However, twice now, during a debate (this one and one that occurred earlier this year), I have heard him infer that middle class Americans are making upwards of $150,000 – $250,000 per year. I find this out of touch and ill-informed. How can he moderate a debate without realizing that more than 80% of the population makes less than $100,000/year (this numbers may not be concrete). If he wants to get rid of bias or gain understanding about the average American, he needs to educate himself more.

    Also, all of traditional media has planted a big seed of doubt in me after the last eight years. I tend to not trust anything any of them say or do.

    Anyway, my two cents.

  4. Anonymous says

    I don’t consider ABC to be the least bit “even keel.” All television news is info-tainment. We haven’t see true news reporting since Walter Cronkite. (Can anybody cite the year the requirement for broadcasting actual news was dropped?)

    In fact, we don’t have ANY news outlet these days that we can rely upon to be “even keel.” So much for freedom of speech and freedom of the press. A fat lot it gets you if you don’t actually require the media to be responsible in excercising their “freedom.”

    Oh! That’s right! Freedom ISN’T FREE! *slaps forehead* How could I have forgotten that! Of COURSE in a society where capitalism has run amok we have a press that cannot be trusted. Time for us all to become neither Democrat nor Republican, rather RADICALS.

    To anonymous #2: The average wage earner in Minnesota makes, I believe, less than $40,000. It seems a few years ago that number had climbed to $36,000, and was considered remarkable.

    We have to remember where Gibson lives – in NYC, $150,000 may well be middle class considering the Manhattan demographics. Out here, middle class would obviously be achieved on considerably less.

  5. Anonymous says

    Here’s evidence that Hillary’s negativity is her demise: http://news.yahoo.com/page/election-2008-political-pulse-obama-gains

    It has seemed more clear through this campaign than ever before that voters are fed up with negative campaigning and won’t tolerate candidates who can’t stay on the high road. Every time a candidate has decided to get down and dirty, they end up taking the next exit. Hillary was able to maintain pretty long, but it was obvious this was coming. All that’s left is for her to decide which exit it is going to be.

  6. Anonymous says

    To anonymous #3. I guess I shouldn’t have lumped people’s incomes into my statement. My basic point was that the middle class far outnumbers the upper class. And, when you take into consideration the geography in which an individual or family resides, the middle class has not seen the gains in income or lifestyle that the upper class has seen. We are basically being left in the dust and elitists like Charlie Gibson don’t get it.

    Oh, and by the way, there is a petition at moveon.org regarding the debate and general state of our so-called media.

Speak Your Mind

*

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.