Media Criticism

I have been away for the last week for several reasons including burnout from writing for several blogs at the same time. My major reason for taking a week away from Media Criticism was a desire to get perspective on the state of the 2008 presidential race. I know I am not the first person to say the following but I don’t think I have made comments as cynical as the ones in this post.

I was watching coverage on MSNBC, CNN and listening to coverage on NPR of Tuesday’s Pennsylvania Democratic primary over the last week. The daily posts that I submit for this blog and others do not allow me to see the forest for the trees in many cases especially with my hyperactive coverage of the presidential race since last summer. I have to say that it doesn’t matter if Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton wins any one of these primaries. It also doesn’t matter which candidate gets the most delegates by the end of the primary process. There will be unseemly machinations and underhanded deeds performed by handlers on both sides during the party’s August convention.

We are all aware of Hillary Clinton’s reputation as a lurker and a political figure who works in shadows and gray hues to achieve her goals. Barack Obama speaks a good game but the fact that his past is relatively unknown compared to Clinton and John McCain creates an aura of invincibility around the candidate. Every politician is a pig at the trough, pushing aside competitors in search of the biggest reserve of slop. The situation would be the same if John McCain was in a pitched battle with one of his Republican competitors. There is no difference in the process of nominating candidates from either party and marginal differences in the policies they would pursue when in office.

I am going to continue analyzing alternative newspapers and media of all types with tomorrow’s post beginning a series on independent radio stations. The political realm seems to dirty and unrewarding to waste time talking about on a daily basis. I think I have reached a point where I have gone from a political junkie to someone who realizes that political junkies are to promoting good policy as fantasy football players are to enjoying individual football games.

We heard all about 527 groups like Swift Boat Veterans for Truth and America Coming Together in the 2004 presidential election. The term “swift boat�? has been used since the despicable attack on Senator John Kerry on his war record. We will hear some more “swift boat�? ads this cycle with Senator John McCain’s Vietnam War record on trial. The only difference is that we will hear these ads from non-profits as well as 527 groups.

Mother Jones had an article on its website today that highlights changes in campaign finance law that will make third-party ads more prominent in the election. The Supreme Court eased the McCain-Feingold campaign finance law in June 2007 but the FEC has recently rule that several 527 groups broke these laws. It seems that the federal government continues to be at odds, struggling between the inevitable and permanent pressure of money in politics and token efforts at reform.

We will see non-profit groups all over the political spectrum participate in the slash-and-burn techniques that we have become accustomed to in American politics. I think that Americans need to take on a greater share of responsibility for the effectiveness of these ads. American voters who knew that George W. Bush was an ineffective president were pushed around by Republican operatives using the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth as a legal shield for their dirty deeds. The unique nature of the 2008 election means that we will see ugly ads about Barack Obama as a Muslim extremist, Hillary Clinton as an extension of her lightning rod of a husband and John McCain as a hypocrite and a liar. It is up to every voter to bypass ads from groups outside of the campaigns by finding balance among the myriad sources of information. We have no one to blame but ourselves if we are convinced by any of the faulty arguments and half-truths espoused by non-profit groups.

It is time to look at John McCain as the Republican nominee, no offense to Mike Huckabee and his valiant efforts on Super Tuesday. McCain was able to beat Mitt Romney and Huckabee in a diverse range of states from California to New Hampshire with the help of Republican voters. The fact that some independents voted for him is overblown considering the largesse of independents voting on the Democratic side of the ballot. Mitt Romney’s victories in places like Montana and Alaska along with Huckabee’s victories in Dixie don’t give the Republicans anything they don’t already have.

It is time for conservative pundits and commentators to realize that they have no value in helping the Republican Party. I will extend this beyond talking heads of the right to people on television who are dogmatic in their political beliefs. Ann Coulter saying that she would stump for Clinton instead of voting for McCain and Rush Limbaugh bloviating on about the destruction of the Republican Party show the ridiculous vacuum these “analysts�? live within.

Imagine Ann Coulter running for Senate in whatever state she was spawned. It is difficult, isn’t it? Coulter emerging from the conservative coterie to debate a living, breathing Democrat who is experienced in dealing logically with alternative view points is unlikely in this lifetime. I cannot imagine Ann Coulter trying to glad-hand people for donations. I won’t even get into Rush Limbaugh’s limited potential as a candidate given his inability to stay on ESPN after comments about Donovan McNabb. These well-fed commentators know nothing of the challenges of the real world. They only know challenges to their narrow and previously untouched viewpoints that are as ridiculous as the platform of Lyndon Larouche.

The purpose of parties (and their advocates) is to represent a viewpoint unrepresented in the current political dialogue. The purpose of political leaders is to bring together multiple parties when possible to fix problems in an ad hoc manner. The reality is that political leaders ride parties until the realities of national politics make kowtowing unnecessary. Americans say they are sick of the two-party system but they are really sick of dogmatic party leaders. I think that the nominee for the Democrats and John McCain need to demonstrate that they are political leaders and not party leaders to amass any semblance of a mandate after January 2009.

I have to apologize for not posting in the last few days. I wanted to take in the collective experience of the Florida primary and the debates on both sides before posting. I watched the CNN Republican debate in the Ronald Reagan Library with great interest, mostly to see how ugly it would get between John McCain and Mitt Romney. I also tried keeping track of Ronald Reagan references but I ran out of fingers.

I think that John McCain has the same problem in debates as George W. Bush had in 2000 and 2004. Bush smirked and smiled his way through the debates while his opponents earnestly wrote notes and listened attentively. I am not sure if sitting down in front of Reagan’s Air Force One made McCain more prone to smiling at his new momentum but the Arizona senator was smirking his way through the entire debate. I cannot believe that I am siding with Mitt Romney in this debate but I thought he seemed more presidential, for whatever that is worth.

I don’t want to get into my problems with CNN’s debate rules notably the lack of strict time restrictions (check out my next entry on the Democratic debates). My bigger problem was the utter lack of coverage for Governor Mike Huckabee and Representative Ron Paul. The stage was not that big and there were only four candidates to speak with over 90 minutes. I found the fact that Ron Paul got the biggest applause of the night for his anti-war stance to be heartening considering the Republican audience.

The Des Moines Register published a poll on Sunday that showed Senator Hillary Clinton gaining a lead on previous Iowa favorite John Edwards and the “it�? candidate, Senator Barack Obama. The Clinton campaign and the mainstream media have pushed this recent success by Clinton as a sign that she is emerging as the most viable candidate for the Democrats. My question about this poll and other polls is whether they are a product or a generator of media hype. In other words, does the Des Moines Register poll result from Clinton’s hype in the national press or will the poll generate greater press for Clinton and feed conspiracy theories among independents?

I look back to the Iowa Republican Party’s straw poll as an example of how starved for news the mainstream media is these days. The poll was bought by Mitt Romney and not attended by Giuliani, McCain and Fred Thompson. The hype around Romney’s success and the dark horse success of Governor Mike Huckabee were grasped onto by major newspapers and TV networks after months of exhausting rhetoric. The answer to my original question based on the Iowa straw poll and subsequent straw polls in other states is that the poll is reflective of media attention rather than grassroots support.

Clinton and Romney share a similar problem in a general election. Both candidates would try to point out flip-flopping and political opportunism while failing to address their own flip-flopping and opportunism in the past. The Iowa caucuses are still three months away and there are too many independents in states like Iowa and New Hampshire to claim that Senator Clinton has struck a blow against her opponents. I implore the national press and the voters of early primary states to consider their choices carefully and avoid these polls like the plague.

I can’t wait to vote for president in the November 2008 round of balloting. That is, if I can scrounge up the $35 it will take to get into the ballet. Maybe I can have the DNC or RNC pay my way in. Wait a minute, we don’t have to do that in the general election. It is free. So are the presidential primaries. I guess I was mistaken due to the recent Iowa straw poll won by professional spender Mitt Romney.

The Iowa straw poll was one of the most anticlimactic events in recent political history. Rudy Giuliani, Fred Thompson and a slew of others did not bother to campaign in Iowa. Bottom tier candidates like Tommy Thompson and Hunter Thompson hoped that their hard work in the state could yield a second place finish behind Romney. Even the surprising move up the ladder by Mike Huckabee could not save the boring finish in Iowa.

I love watching speeches, listening to debates and tracking what candidates are doing. The Iowa straw poll is a sign of what is wrong with modern politics. The New York Times’ blog on political issues covered the poll like it was something important. The Iowa Republican Party got a big donation from Iowa voters as well as the various campaigns that paid entrance for their voters. Most importantly, nothing substantive came of the event because everyone knows that a) Mitt Romney has cash, b) Ron Paul has fervent supporters and c) John McCain is sinking fast. Well done, Iowa, I can’t wait to see how you set the pace in a few weeks. I assume you will continue moving your primary up to maintain the pace as “First in the Nation.�?

If it was any secret that money makes the political world go round, the cat’s out of the bag. The competition for president is already fierce, and raising money is more important than ever. Nobody knows this better than Republican candidate John McCain.

The Washington Post ran an article yesterday regarding McCain’s financial troubles. He has failed to raise significant amounts of money, while Democratic candidate Barack Obama is setting fund raising records. Whether this is due to excellent efforts by the Democrats or whether it’s simply an indication of the nation’s unhappiness with a war that McCain still supports is unclear. Either way, the media have jumped on this issue; not enough money means one of the high-profile Republican candidates may be toast.

The fact that McCain’s campaign can be crippled by money woes indicates a significant trend in American politics. We think idealistically about elections; we want to vote in the best (wo)man for the job. However, our perception of who this person may be is clouded by the incredible amount of media coverage devoted to the election. On top of that, there are rallies, political advertisements, grassroots campaigns, and thousands of other ways candidates are trying to get their message (and their names) out there. We, the people, are bombarded on every side by political persuasion techniques, and money buys the best ones. It is no secret that the candidate with the most money has an advantage.

The bottom line is that American politics is theater. We watch debates where candidates say nothing; we listen to speeches where candidates sit on the fence; we watch political advertisements where candidates tear each other to bits. At the end of the day, when we walk into the voting booth, those influences follow us behind that curtain. The media, therefore, must not forget the power it has to influence and must use that power wisely.

For McCain, the race may be over, or it may have just begun. Either the media frenzy surrounding his poor financial situation will spur his supporters to donate more, or people will stop pouring money into what they see is a sinking ship. The media’s spin on the issue will help determine this, and the coming weeks will provide us with a more definitive answer of McCain’s campaign.