My relationship with the media is extensive, but rather than going on about the various particulars of my daily interactions with television, radio, internet, newspapers, etc., I thought it might be more interesting to look at things from a particularly relevant perspective this time of year: election coverage. I'll freely admit that I am normally not someone who follows politics closely, but this particular election, aside from the fact that it is the first election I can vote in (I turned 18 about a month after the 2004 Kerry/Bush debacle), is becoming particularly legendary. For one thing, we might be heading towards the first black American president. For another, the hype that has been created revolving around Sarah Palin and her family seems to demonstrate the news media's tendency to lean towards the side of entertainment rather than information. I find this to be particularly disturbing in the heat of such an important election because the coverage that Palin-related gossip is getting is truly taking away from the actual issues that these candidates stand for. We're spending too much time as a country wondering if Bristol's baby daddy really did intend to marry her before it was confirmed that Sen. Palin was John McCain's choice for vice president. I personally don't want those reporters who are trying to get down to the nitty-gritty of a subject to be denied the chance to bring Americans the information they want and deserve. Just an example, Campbell Brown's interview with Tucker Bounds.
One particular blog that I've been familiar with since last year (I started reading it for Professor Snyder's MCS 222 class and continued for most of the year), the Daily Kos, was cited for a posting that discussed rumors about Palin's newborn son - that he was in fact her grandson and that they had covered up her daughter's previous pregnancy. Although these rumors were soon after proven to be false, I was still taked aback by the boldness of what I consider to be a generally trustworthy, albeit extremely liberal, news source. I try to remain objective about the things I see in the media, but it is hard for me to fully put aside my liberal-leaning tendencies. On the other hand, I do see it as almost impossible for anyone today to get the straight story without some sort of bias; we tend to gravitate toward what we know, or at least what we want to hear.
Though I am not a media addict, I am far from a Luddite. For most of my life my parents have listened to NPR in the car and at home, subscribed to The Washigton Post and the Wall Street Journal, and watched nightly news shows including PBS, MSNBC, CNN, and occasionally the major networks as well. This has pretty much meant that whether or not I wanted to be, I was constantly surrounded by information about what was going on in the world. I have gotten better about paying attention to the abundance of media sources around me in the years since high school, but I think I still have a long way to go before I am sitting down every day reading the Post through, front to back. I can only hope that in the future my habits will gravitate more towards hard news and away from the bored indifference I have occasionally been known to display. As long as there is something important being covered, on a national, local or even international scale, I will be a rapt listener.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
It is great to see someone out there who pays such close attention especially at such a young age. I wish I could say I envy you, but the truth is I don't. You pointed out exactly what I hate about the media and politics and basically the reason I do not watch the news that often. The media is too distracted with issues that have no real relavance. I'd much rather hear Palin's stance on healthcare rather than her daughter's baby situation, but every time I turn on the news all it is is gossip and rating grabers. The media tells stories that sell to the public which I feel is wrong, it makes sense, but it is wrong. I also tend to disagree with this election being historic. This election will most likely barely change anything in the everyday lives of most Americans. We'll still find something to complain about or something wrong with the administration. The truth is, no president is a good president until they're out of office. I tend to especially avoid election coverage because I hate the way politicians conduct themselves. It is already bad enough that my choices are set before me based on money. Everything everyone says or does can be very easily negatively connatated. I believe polictics is a circus wrought with curruption. And you may ask, "well, where do you think we lost our way?" My answer is, "we never found it." All we have done as a nation is find newer and better ways to currupt ourselves politically.
Great points. I do find it strange that the media pulls on gossip stories rather that actual facts to inform the public. people should vote for people based on their experience and viewpoints, not if their daughter got pregnant at age 17.
I like your links, particularly the interview with Tucker Bounds. And I'm with you on being not a media addict, but not a Luddite either. For me that probably has something to do with your earlier point about having to sift through so much BS to get to stories of relevance.
First off, I love the title of you blog. Very eye-catching. I agree with you almost one hundred percent. I think that the media needs to back of some of the more petty issues and focus on the more meaty aspect of the election as this is one of the most historic elections we've had in a while. Personally I could care less about who Palin's daughter's baby daddy is. Where are the real issues?
Post a Comment