It started as early as 1796 election Adams v Jefferson. The newspapers were merciless in attacking opposing candidates.
Today there seems to be a fairer balance in visual media, since our technology provides for our own viewing of historic events.
Print media is and always be dependent on the power of the editorial.
Buy another newspaper if you wish!
Radio talk shows, no thanks, but listening to a speech is always welcome.
Best
Ricky
The media always plays a role in our elections, if they didn't why would the candidates need so much money to run?
There was a time when the guy down the street could break the story and work himself up to major media player. Lets be honest the only way to get prime coverage for a reporter is to either have great connections OR come from the right school. So if one could afford a journalism degree from a high priced school (name recognition) one comes from a background that is NOT the average.
Boy Howdy....are they! But it's nothing new.
Right now, we are in the last part of the "kill them with silence" stage. Media picks it's darlings....pounds the names out constantly....ignores the distained....the masses only remember the "annointed" - hence vote only for the Media endorsed candidates.
If you remember back to the Nomination of G.W......it was an astounding excercise of this. It was as if THERE WERE NO OTHER REPUBLICAN CANDIDATES for the nomination. I was astounded by the audacity of Media to do such a thing. Was especially dismayed, as his fathers administration ,did nothing to make me think another Bush was a good idea.
Predictably, the best Republican candidates for the nomination are, for the most part, unknown. (Come to think of it, this is probably true of the Dems as well)
What is the media? In this country the media is controlled by a few Corporations and the message we get is what these people want us to hear. It is altogether right and proper that the media gets involved in our politics, the danger is in depending on the media for information to help make decisions on how we vote.
Reading books is the best way to understand the issues and listening to political speeches is equally important. But the CNN clown collection or the Fox fools mean nothing to me.
posted by umac
8 months ago
UMAC, that's so right. Of course they should be involved... but they don't appear to be unbiased!
Veggie I was going to make a comment but I believe the folks ahead of me have answered your question.
Me too. Just looking out on the internet for news about the S. Carolina debates and saw nothing but stories about the fighting between Obama and Clinton. Nothing at all about the things they said with substance!
The media is more interested in selling advertising than covering the news. I'm sure they would like Britney Spears to sober up long enough to endorse a candidate. That's the lead story at 6:00.
The media gives the public what they want to hear. The majority of them anyway. I would love to turn on the news and hear something of substance coming out of the debates, instead I get who is slinging mud at whom or how Hililary Clinton and John Edwards are ganging up on Barack Obama. An hour or two reduced to 10 second sound bites.
I believe this is called the Dumbing of America.
