The role of the media in this election

[nadinbrzezinski]

if any of you believe you are electing YOUR candidate, you are delusional.

First they didn't cover Kucinich and then made sure he did not participate in debates... the media, yes the media had a great role in him not gaining any traction.

Now Edwards is droping out after the media telling us he is not viable for literally months and not really covering him either. He didn't gain any traction either... no face time, no traction.

This is going to be a historic election. Not only are we going to have the first woman or african american, but fully the first media made candidate. And the sad part is that many here on DU are going rah rah... the process is broken... to the point that YOU do not get to hear the candidates unless they are media (and corporation) approved

Sad.

Will many things change in DC if either of these two gets elected? Sadly, not really. Read Paul Krugman on the subject, and both their economic policies. Will they be slightly better than the Loons the republicans are running? Yes, but the empire will chug along just fine, as well as our descent into fascism. Of course History is a bitch, and if things get as bad as they did in 1930... well guess what? They either dust off keynes and the new deal, or they will be remembered as disasters. (And there is a good chance that things WILL turn out that badly)... so gloat around... your media created candidate is indeed the last man or woman standing.. as for me, I will vote... why? I will make them steal my vote. Nothing to do with citizen's duty or any of that crap. But hope is completely gone... that the system could even work. It does not... period. And I expect the media to pull the same crap in 2012, oh and I expect the media to further consolidate... after all five people owning all we watch and think and read is not enough... we need to get this down to at least three. And these two "candidates" will gladly help. After all, they owe quite a bit of their ambition to a broken media system that makes sure they get what they need. Oh and call me crazy, but they want HRC... after all with her back in the White House, you can COUNT on a scandal ridden administration, that WILL be investigated and probably impeached. After all, her crime being a woman and a Clinton.

Rant off...

Politics, smhelitics... Cicero was right... and he wrote about the Roman Republic and its failure! We are now witnessing the failure of the American Republic... so go ahead, rah, rah, rah..

[papau]

1. We appear to watching and reading media in different lands - MSM is Obama land 24/7

[nadinbrzezinski]

2. Then I did miss the "scandal" over the hand shake

and again read Krugman on Obama's economic policy... it would benefit them as well. She is down right populist compared to him.

Regardless they are BOTH a media creation

[papau]

10. Krugman is just a truth teller - and the cable news has spent the days since SOTU telling us there

was no snub.

[nadinbrzezinski]

11. You were here the night of the SOTU

weren't you?

They can say whatever they want... sorry to tell you this but that scandal WAS a media creation and DU'ers swallowed the kool aid, gladly

As to Paul Krugman... I'll take his analysis any day and twice on Sunday

[papau]

15. :-) "snub" exists because photographer said that is what happened -and he's a 30 yr guy w/ great rep

Like all of us - he could be wrong -

In any case it is very very unimportant - except on DU

Krugman's 1/28/08 column notes that in 92 Bill tried the Obama approach and - "what good did Mr. Clinton’s message of inclusiveness do him?" - and then notes the history of the GOP response to Bill trying for a group hug.

[nadinbrzezinski]

18. He also wrote that Obama is far more "conservative" in

his economic policy than Clinton

[Prefer]

3. Iran here we come!

[Eurobabe]

4. There will be many more wars

[nadinbrzezinski]

6. Of course, the logic of empire is inscapable

and that baby will probably be going to war when he is old enough... or the Empire will be a memory... if he is lucky

After all, history again is a bitch, and all empires collapse and we are at the end stage of this one

[Individualist]

5. Excellent post!

There's no doubt we're living in Orwellian times.

[pampango]

7. Most of us think that the MSM backs every candidate but our own.

We remember very well every time there is a "hit piece" against our candidate, every time there is a "puff piece" for a rival candidate.

I've enjoy the posts here to the effect that "even the New York Times" or "CNN" has published a favorable story about my candidate. In other words, even when there is a favorable story about our candidate in the MSM, we maintain the stance that the MSM is still against us. Of course, supporters of the other candidates point to those same stories as evidence that the MSM is against their candidate.

And so it goes. ;)

[nadinbrzezinski]

8. My stance is not about A CANDIDATE, but how the coprorations

are now playing an immense role in WHO we think is viable and WHO we support.

They use MARKETING techniques to push those who are friendly, or in this case friendlier, to corporations.

And I am sure a graduate student in either history or political science, after the fall of the United States (yes history is again a bitch), will find the last days to be exactly as I have described in this post. The media started playing king maker in an obvious fashion in 2000... this year it's just sickening

[nolabels]

12. They couldn't have guessed a candidate i liked because i never had one

The Howard Dean experience has taught some of us well. Any one that perceived that they had a candidate with strength should know that strength will turned against them in this corporate media - rovian run world. The establishment gives you what they want you to believe and changes it as they see fit, bank on it

[nadinbrzezinski]

13. I liked two and I knew they had no chance

the corpos would make sure of it... after all any populist is dangerous to them... why them propping huckabee for all of five seconds actually surprised me. (Yes, he is a right wing populist, they do exist)

[nolabels]

14. I hope this is not the nebulous of the year 1988

Just because someone thinks and or many around them believe they will be a shoe-in does not make them that. How did we get a bush #1 after Raygun, a self fractured democratic electorate that was antagonized and relapsing because of what they were fed. The bait and switch that gave us many a democratic candidate seems alive and well today

[nadinbrzezinski]

17. I hope the same

but this will be an election that has not been determined by us

[femrap]

30. Because the preachers are easily bought...that's why. nt

[redqueen]

9. Great analysis...

I wanted to sarcastically respond: "Go away! Batin!"

[tnlurker]

16. This needs a lot more recommendations

I was #2.

This post speaks the way I feel.

[MonkeyFunk]

19. How many more debates

would've made Kucinich the frontrunner?

[Ytzak]

20. I am not sure whether they are created by the Media or just...

perceived as the best attractor of ratings on the News shows.

The candidates themselves have not been shy about courting the Media, to get the media to adopt them as their darling. But I don't see a conspiracy by the media to determine who the President will be.

In 2000, Bush became the media darling, and they turned on Gore as if they were lions riping the guts out of a sleeping Water Buffalo. In 2004, they tuned on Dean and anointed Kerry as the "man democrats most thought could beat Bush." But the Media failed to do its job to expose the Swift Boat attacks, dropped Kerry like a hot rock, and continued the general Media Man crush on Bush.

The Media adopted Obama very early, gushing over his "Super Star" Status. Clinton's media coverage has been decidedly cold, and they were already burying the carcass in New Hampshire when she won. In general, they have played Obama as the gentlemanly opponent trying to stay above the fray and made Clinton/Clintons out to be mud wrestler's trying to rip off Obama's thong before the eyes of the whole world. Obama has certainly been the media darling this campaign season.

But I don't see evidence of a media that is conspiring in back rooms to anoint a new Emperor. I think it comes down to a horse race mentality in the media who will do anything for a buck, buck, buck.

They don't cover people like Kucinich or Gravel because they recognized that most of the Democrats never took those campaigns seriously. I am not saying Kucinich didn't have great ideas, or it wasn't fun to watch Gravel say things that we wanted everyone to say, but no one can claim that Gravel or Kucinich ever caught fire as a candidate. Without a win, they've dumped Edwards to focus on the main candidates, just as they dumped Gu9\llani. But as perennial third place winner we liberal progressives didn't fall in line behind him. (Don't kid yourself, Edwards is not getting enough in Campaign donations to compete. This game at this stage is all about money.)

Yes, the 9 media moguls could have gotten together for Poker and drinks at Murdoch's house and decided who was gong to be President this year. They could have invited the Black Box makers over and read them the riot act.

But it might also be that the media has read the mood of the voters.

[nadinbrzezinski]

21. The media has been playing king maker, in an obvious manner since

2000.

The, but they got the voter's feeling is crap... why? If you cannot get your message to folks, how are they going to learn of it?

The only thing they have done that is surrendering to the voter is they know a republican will have a hard time winning this time, legally that is.

[Ytzak]

23. It is not the media's job to take the message to the voters...

The media's job is to report on the race. I think that they did not treat each of the different campaigns equally. They obviously played favorites, on the Democratic side giving far more coverage to Obama and Hillary. They have also tended to skew the coverage. The media was complicit in repeating endlessly the early story about Edwards Haircut, and never really went out to see how much Hillary, Obama, Romney, McCain or anyone else put into this aspect of their campaign.

The main job of taking the message to the people is that of the person running for office. This is where we see the most acute need of nationally financed campaigns. Kucinich never managed to build up enough of a campaign war chest to compete. He didn't have the money to advertise so he could not deliver his message. Edwards suffered a similar fate. His campaign donations lagged behind Hillary and Obama, and just did not have the money to continue to run. Those who can not afford to advertise can not compete in these races. That is a flaw in the system.

No media organization has infinite resources. With limited resources, realistically, how should they allot coverage to the campaigns? Should they give each campaign equal coverage, or cover the campaign most that they perceive people are most interested in? I am biased on the side of equal coverage. The decision by the media was made by the money. If people are interested in Obama and Hillary, they will give them Obama and Hillary. It's not fair, but in our system it's not a surprise, either.

The tendency for the Media too choose a darling and go with them is a problem, but I don't see that it is a conspiracy to determine who runs. Hell, we all choose our darlings.

And as for the empire, the current President has placed the empire in full decay. The next President will probably oversee its demise. History is moving away from Euro-centric power bases and the east is rising. It will be a good thing to read about in history books but lousy to live through.

[Uncle Joe]

27. I believe in the best of all worlds, that's exactly what the media's job should be.

Pass the message to the voters, how else can the voters make an informed decision? If all the corporate media does is report on the race, that's a disservice to the American People and they should get out of the business. Even worse than that is to slander, libel, ignore, obfuscate and demean a candidate, hell Albert Einstein had a funny looking hair cut, and yes I know he didn't run for public office, but you get my drift.

The debates should have equal time, the ironic thing was them dropping Kucinich in a later debate after they had already accepted him. Richardson had just dropped out and the media claimed that time element was a concern, this with fewer candidates than they started with, go figure the logic in that.

I believe if the corporate media reported on the message instead of the B.S. spin and horse race aspect, their finite resources would go much farther. However by just letting money be the determinant and treating money as speech will only insure continued domination by the oligarchs and mega corporations and just as surely as snowflakes melt in hell, so will the middle and eventually upper middle class as the money all floats to the top.

[Ytzak]

31. The job of a free press is to hold the feet of those in power to the fire.

If they become the primary water carriers to get a campaigns message out there is no impartiality.

[nadinbrzezinski]

33. They are not doing any of that

they are playing the game of who gets what across... ah George Orwell would be so proud of these guys.

[nadinbrzezinski]

32. In an ideal world the media would report

we don't live in that world. And the media is the door through which candidates must reach the people.

If you don't get interviews, you don't get your message out. If the interviews you get (few and far between) start with who will you endorse when you get out, that is a problem.

We can agree to disagree. You think the media doesn't have that much power (never mind you gave us one of those media marketing creations, a haircut) then there nothing more we can talk about this.

As to the empire, yes it is in decline and once it dissolves the US itself may go away, but that is fodder for another post.

[Uncle Joe]

22. They turned on Al Gore because he empowered us

when he championed opening up the Internet for the people and as the Internet grew in power and influence, the corporate media came to see it as a threat to their status quo bottom line way of making mega bucks by controlling information with their one way megaphones. Information = power, money and influence especially around our ever growing election cycle time when they can play King or Queen maker. They came to resent Al Gore for working to give this power to the people and instead of giving him credit or praise for his political vision and leadership, they did nothing but bear false witness, slander and libel against him, I call it the Prometheus Treatment. Thus doing their best to tear down the credibility of the superior applicant for the most powerful job in the land, while they simultaneously camouflaged Bush's obvious shortcomings, mistakes and lies.

As a nation we would go to pay for that betrayal against the American People's best interest possibly with 9/11, definitely with the Iraq War, abandonment of the victims from Katrina and subsequent drain on the economy through mismanagement and corruption by the Cheney/Bush administration.

Bill Clinton rewarded the corporate media by giving them the integrity ammunition issue on a silver platter just in time for the 2000 selection, with the Clinton/Lewinsky Scandal and also with Hillary competing with Al Gore for national funds at his own fundraiser in California while Hillary was only running in New York meanwhile Bush was setting records raising money. Bill Clinton after telling Ken Burns he had a more delicate role to play in the upcoming 2000 convention because he was coming off of scandal and impeachment would proceed to take the longest walk in convention history down the hallway wasting precious prime time air time just so the cameras could gaze at his face as opposed to using his vaunted oratory skills to promote Al Gore for President from the lectern.

The same corporate media which waged a continuous witch hunt against the Clintons to get them out of the White House while keeping Bill Clinton under a microscope to which he finally rewarded them, started promoting Hillary Clinton for President almost immediately after she won her first Senate term in New York. Today, I believe the corporate media has been doing their best to pay back the Clintons for betraying Al Gore by using them as the plan B backup choice in case their Republican selection doesn't win and either way the coup of 2000 will be complete.

[Ytzak]

25. In 2000 Al Gore did not empower us as I recall...

He ran a so so campaign. The media did turn on him, refusing to investigate and call the right on the lies that they passed to the media. They criticiesed the color of his suit and tie. They passed lies that were easily debunked.

I would have voted for Al Gore this year in a heart beat, but he is a better man now than he was in 2000. But I don't think he would have done well. The media did not like him then and that antipathy would have been sharpened. Going on the stump to be President would have ended his work to stop global warming. I think he is doing a great job right now and should continue that work.

[Uncle Joe]

26. Al Gore worked to pass this legislation while he was in Congress and

he worked to expand it as Vice-President, the corporate media knew from the beginning where he stood and where they would eventually be as the Internet grew in power and influence, thereby slowly weaning the people off of television. What logical just minded adult could possibly believe that a well respected sitting Vice-President with a distinguished career in the Congress would claim to have invented the Internet as if he were a scientist in a laboratory? That was just the tip of the iceberg, Al Gore claimed to have discovered Love Canal, another twisted lie of theirs, although the hearings he held on a toxic waste dump in Toone Tn. eventually led him to that. Every lie and slander the corporate media put forth was against his credibility and it wasn't the Republicans that really hurt him, nor even the far left that did the damage, it was the corporate media as a dysfunctional whole.

You say Al Gore ran a so so campaign, I contend no human on the face of the planet can run a good one when a handful of corporations which control 90% of everything the American People hear on the radio, see on television, read in magazines, newspapers and books decide to demonize that candidate. I further contend their goals are at odds with the American People's, they don't represent the people they represent the corporations and those aren't the same. In spite of all this, Al Gore won the popular vote by over half a million counted votes only to ultimately be cheated by a partisan Supreme Court but the corporate media made it close enough for the neocons to steal in the first place.

I believe Al Gore is doing a great job now as well, but the nation and our democratic republic has been severely damaged and in the final analysis the people are the big losers.

[Mike03]

24. Another heartfelt reallity check. Thanks, Nadin,

It's always good to read your work here. Even though it hurts!

Kick and Rec.

[Prophet 451]

28. Bread and circuses

I forget who coined the term but it was a Roman who invented the phrase "bread and circuses" and what he meant was that so long as the people are fed and distracted, they won't cause their masters much trouble. You can see the same process today. People will not believe that the USA is sliding into fascism until there's tanks in the streets and by then, of course, it's too late. It has also been said that the beating heart of Rome was The Forum and that's true in a sense. Protocol allowed anyone to speak in The Forum so what you tended to end up with was a giant bickering contest which allowed the plebs to feel their voices were being heard while the patricians quietly did whatever they wanted to do.

Bread and circuses. Has there ever been an election run more on bread and circuses? The succession of non-issues we've had to endure has been endless. Just to pick a few, there's been John Edward's haircut, Hillary Clinton's cleavage, the debate about whether Obama is "black enough" or too black, the "snub" and on and on. Even if any of those were true (and I neither know nor care), would they actually make any difference? Bush was famously described as the candidate most voters would like to have a beer with. That's all well and good but it doesn't tell us anything about his ability to run a country. Likewise, no-one is their right mind should care about Edward's haircut, Hillary's tits or Barrack's skin colour. Those are either non-issues or should be. And yet, Americans want their president to be not just competant but likeable. Al Gore in 2000 appeared to have a stick up his ass for most of the campaign but you can be damn sure he would have made a better president than Chimpy.

The people are not stupid as such but they are easily distracted and trained to deal in trivialities.

Bread and circuses, the noise of The Forum and the roar of the mob.

[nadinbrzezinski]

34. Cicero, hence my reference to him

:-)

[femrap]

29. I was just thinking about you...

and now I see a post. Yep, the MSM...just like old Soviet machine, right?

I am hoping that the US can at least become something like France...a good tourist spot with scenic countryside and some good food, at least on the Coasts.

Hell, I am looking forward to the end of the Mayan calendar..12-21-2012....the paradigm will shift.

k and r.

P.S. Heard Scott Ritter this past Sunday...Iran is set for late March/early April...but there are many in the military/gov't/intelligence who are against so there is room to BELIEVE and ACT in favor of no military action.

[Tatiana]

35. Dean was smeared and the Clark was ignored by the media in '04.

Why would this election cycle be any different? The media is a BUSINESS. They are looking to make a profit (political advertisements are big $$$). They benefit financially from creating a "horse race."

They benefit from pushing a candidate that "business loves."

They benefit from pushing a candidate that is naive and lacks experience in policy and dirty politics.

Meanwhile the people with the best foreign policy (Biden), best immigration policy (Richardson - which included same-sex couples for marriage sponsorship), best Constitutional authority (Dodd), and best health care policy (Kucinich) can barely get on TEEVEE.

Some democracy.