|
Said it really didn't matter who started it, the country needs leadership now...
Well, Dan, it is important who started it. But this isn’t about that. What perhaps is of more importance to the American public is who covers this crap. Who elevates every scurrilous charge made by a candidate or surrogate to the OMG level with each passing news cycle? Your "brethren" in the media, is who. Which isn't in and of it self all that bad, but then you, meaning your profession, then just let what ever is said, no matter how ridiculous the charge, stand there, unchallenged, as if because you repeat it you are therefore absolved of any potential charge of bias. What are you afraid of?
Don't look so surprised Dan, after all, the media is the referee in this mud rasslin' death match to the finish. They, or rather you, could, you know, stand aloof and cover only the issues. But, you say, that is not your job. (Which, BTW Dan, all candidates who care enough about this country have spelled out in great detail, by now, one would hope, on their respective websites exactly where they stand on the issues of the day. And Dan, if you don't know where John McCain or Barack Obama stand on any given issue, well, learn how to surf the net.)
So the question is placed down; Dan, what precisely is your job? To act as a conduit for all things Great and Small, that you and your brethren should always take a hear no evil; see no evil speak no evil approach? Well, we see where that has gotten us now haven't we.
And so here is the conundrum, so to speak. Fox covers something and the guys over at CNN then have to put their spin on it which caused MSNBC to erupt with their take on the mud flying. Then the mightily "anchors" on the networks chime in and splay all things out to the public in equal doses of the same bland coverage, devoid of any real "judgment", heaven forbid, behind what is presented. Is that really what you all went to journalism school for? Oh yea, I forgot, we are talking TV news so it only matters how you are perceived and not where you studied or what you know. In the end, is it really that difficult to do your job in this day of instantaneous information?
And don't get me started on the poll watching. That is the broadcast media's fall back coverage, the horse race. I admit to watching the polls with the same enthusiasm I had as a child who discovers the sport page for the first time and so forever after rushes to the front door to grab the morning news, tears open that paper to see what his beloved Indians did on the west coast last night (I'm showing my age. Once upon a time there was no ESPN or, for that matter, internet. Quaint.)
There is some room for hope. The truth squads first appeared in the newspapers as long ago as the 1970's. They dissected TV ads. Your guys in the Cable news business seem to have just discovered this neat little trick. What, 30-40 years after the fact.
Underlying all of this is the myth that a grand political discourse in the vein of the Lincoln Douglas debates lies just beneath the surface and will someday gush forth from the well spring of American greatness.
As if.
But it usually takes just one person, one brave individual to put that "spin" on the day. Remember old Joe McCarthy back in the 50's? Well, it took one brave news team with a real love for their country to stand up to him. And then one noble, heroic individual to finally rise up for America and say after all, have you no decency?
Where is our Joseph Nye Welch?
But perhaps the most important question is where is our Edward R. Murrow?
Right now, I think the American people would settle for Joe Dimaggio.
Back to you Dan...
|