PAtownhall.com
Pennsylvania's Marketplace of Ideas
Pennsylvania's Marketplace of Ideas
PAtownhall.com
Pennsylvania's Marketplace of Ideas
Pennsylvania's Marketplace of Ideas
by Chris Freind
Pop-Quiz: What percentage of Americans know the difference in the health care policies of Oback Barama and Hillary Clinton?
How about just two distinctions between Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee?
In both cases, close to none.
You can thank the media for that.
America's Fourth Estate has truly lost its way, and the American people are taking the hit. Most disturbing of all is that the media's new direction is a deliberate decision.
Armchair Quarterbacks
Before New Hampshire, the first primary, the media had already written off Hillary Clinton and Mitt Romney. Post-mortems were everywhere---without the benefit of a dead body. And we weren't just hearing this from the "talking head" shows where commentary and opinion are the content. It was the mainstream news stories with anchors and reporters putting their spin---or, in many cases, the network's executives' spin--- on what should have been straightforward news.
The most pathetic line was from FOX analyst and former Clinton adviser Dick Morris, who opined after Hillary's win: "I have never seen a comeback like this in my entire political life." It's obvious the man has been hanging around the Clintons way too long, because he's shamelessly playing both sides. He explained that part of Hillary's win resulted from a New Hampshire Q and A session in which her eyes welled up after being asked a personal question. Morris stated, "She pretended to cry, the women felt sorry for her and they went for her." Great analysis, Dick, except that right before the primary, you said the exact opposite in your newsletter: "Some say it was phony, contrived to make her appear more human and empathetic. Wrong. She must have known the political consequences, particularly for a female candidate, of tears."
It's okay to be wrong, but don't talk out of both sides and act like you were right all along. Whether you like Morris or not, his words and thoughts count to a lot of people. Allowing his hypocrisy is just one glaring example of the media's irresponsibility.
It's one thing to say that an early front runner like Clinton faced a very tough road if, after losing Iowa, she also lost New Hampshire; that is political fact. It's quite another to hear anchors asking reporters in the Granite State on the morning of the election if they thought any of Clinton's supporters actually still believed she had a chance to win. There were even pundits talking about what imploded inside the Clinton campaign, and what things most contributed to her "loss"---not just in Iowa, but the whole race, which had barely begun.
On what are they basing such absurd projections? The freak show called the Iowa caucuses? After all, the Hawkeye State hasn't had tremendous success picking the eventual nominees...Bob Dole (the first time he ran), Pat Robertson, Tom Harkin, Dick Gephardt, etc.
Iowa is for the activists, and New Hampshire is for the independent protest vote. Now the real contests begin.
So, armed with this knowledge, how can the media possibly write off Hillary Clinton? I'm not saying that she will win the nomination; as a matter of fact, I have predicted John Edwards as the nominee any number of times. But rather than reporting the news and educating voters on the candidates' positions and differences, they allocate almost all of their time to polls and focus groups and the "celebrity" and "unstoppable momentum" of Barack Obama. In essence, they are telling us whom to vote for in 2008.
Has it dawned on any of these geniuses that well-financed and highly organized candidates like Clinton and Romney could win their nominations with just a few first place finishes? In most election years, of course, that scenario is impossible, but this in no ordinary election. There have been five contests so far, and we have five different winners. (Yes, Mitt Romney won Wyoming and took the majority of its delegates, but that information is non-existent in the media).
Sure, it's early, but right now Romney has the most delegates, having captured a gold and two silvers. If he averages second place while John McCain, Mike Huckabee, and Rudy Giuliani trade spots on the revolving first place podium, it could be Romney who is standing at the end. Or we could enter the convention without a nominee if no one has a majority of delegates. On the Democratic side, a scaled down version of that situation also exists. If Hillary and Obama trade victories in Michigan and Nevada, and Edwards takes his native state of South Carolina, which he won in 2004, Super Tuesday could produce three "winners".
With so much at stake, you would think the media would be having a field day reporting on all the unique aspects of this campaign.
Nope.
The media is not supposed to manipulate, or, worse, decide elections. But by ignoring their responsibility to report news, choosing instead to make it, they are jeopardizing the very essence of the
what makes us a republic.
