About
Learn More about our progressive online community for the Granite State.

Create an account today (it's free and easy) and get started!
Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


Search




Advanced Search


The Masthead
Managing Editors


Jennifer Daler

Contributing Writers
elwood
Mike Hoefer
susanthe
William Tucker

ActBlue Hampshire

The Roll, Etc.
Prog Blogs, Orgs & Alumni
Bank Slate
Betsy Devine
birch, finch, beech
Democracy for NH
Live Free or Die
Mike Caulfield
Miscellany Blue
Granite State Progress
Seacoast for Change
Still No Going Back
Susan the Bruce
Tomorrow's Progressives

Politicos & Punditry
The Burt Cohen Show
John Gregg
Krauss
Landrigan
Lawson
Pindell
Primary Monitor
Primary Wire
Scala
Schoenberg
Spiliotes
Welch

Campaigns, Et Alia.
Paul Hodes
Carol Shea-Porter
Ann McLane Kuster
John Lynch
Jennifer Daler

ActBlue Hampshire
NHDP
DCCC
DSCC
DNC

National
Balloon Juice
billmon
Congress Matters
DailyKos
Digby
Hold Fast
Eschaton
FiveThirtyEight
MyDD
The Next Hurrah
Open Left
Senate Guru
Swing State Project
Talking Points Memo

50 State Blog Network
Alabama
Arizona
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Missouri
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin

How to Fix the Political Media

by: Douglas E. Lindner

Wed Mar 10, 2010 at 23:46:00 PM EST


If there's one thing Republicans, Democrats, independents, politicians, activists, and observers of all stripes seem to agree on, it's that the news media has some serious room for improvement. A lot of that has to do with broad issues like attitude toward political spin, the things that get the most attention, etc. There are some specific issues, though, that are easy to identify and improve. Here are a few suggestions:

  1. Stop reading Twitter feedback on national television. The world is in deep recession. Our country is at war. Our national government is paralyzed. Most political media outlets have plenty of talking heads who give their talking points without being challenged on the merits; we don't need you to elevate amateurs doing the same in 140 characters or less. It's not even selected insightful comments. Not all information is useful.
  2. Reality is not subjective. Allowing talking points from each party to be broadcast/printed is not journalism. It is not sufficient to show both sides and assume that truth and common sense lie at the midpoint between the parties. Sometimes, people in politics make claims that are false. Sometimes an entire party stands behind falsehood. When that happens, it is the media's responsibility to challenge those people, even if it means alienating a political constituency. Failure on this point is the reason we've spent the past seven years in Iraq.
  3. Not all news is in Washington. Politicians react to news. That's part of handling public affairs. When politics consumes the news, a feedback loop is created ensuring that our government is occupied with mindless nonsense. Barack Obama is not the President of a high school student body. Have some perspective.
  4. Stop creating self-fulfilling prophecies. Voters decide elections, not pundits. When you write off and ignore candidates with less name recognition and less money as soon as the race starts, you ensure they lose the opportunity to catch up. You think Barack Obama was a dark horse for the Democratic nomination in 2008? Tell it to Richardson, Biden, and Dodd, who were shut out from the start. Those three didn't lose in Iowa and New Hampshire come January 2008; they lost in the newsroom in 2007. Do not comment as if with the perspective of history when you do not have the perspective of history.
  5. When discussing legislation, be specific. Just as it is standard practice to note an elected official's party and constituency, it should be standard practice to note a bill's official name and number. Congress and most if not all states have online databases of legislation that include text, description, sponsors, etc., and this is useful information. It's especially important with respect to legislation whose description could be ambiguous as to a specific bill. How many different bills have been introduced in Congress that could be referred to as "the healthcare bill"?
  6. There's a reason The Hill is only read on The Hill. If you're not writing/commenting for an insider audience, adjust your focus and perspective. Narrative and messaging would be more in proportion to their actual importance if you didn't devote so much reporting to narrative and messaging. Sometimes it's as if the only parts of politics that get covered are the parts that don't deserve coverage.
  7. Stop reporting gossip. Political media should not act like Hollywood tabloids. Anonymous hearsay about the President's Chief of Staff using bad words is not news. Where Chris Matthews takes his dry cleaning is not news. Nobody needs to know if Heidi Montag supports Wall Street reform. Basically, if it's on Politico: Click, it's not news.
  8. Either have an opinion or don't. Commentators are commentators and journalists are journalists. There needs to be a clear line in between. Raising "concerns" with a question mark at the end of the headline doesn't absolve you of bias. Was that a Terrorist Fist Jab?
  9. Grow up and get over the shiny objects. Balloon boy. Anna Nicole Smith. Natalie Holloway. Michael Jackson's trial. Michael Jackson's death. These are just a few items that received all-consuming wall-to-wall coverage on the 24-hour news channels. That's not news. Some of it belongs on the E! channel, some of it belongs on the back page of a local paper. It's not a Presidential election. And by the way, during the two out of every four years that are now spent in Presidential elections, the earth continues to rotate upon its axis and the world continues to function. Elections should be about more than election narrative.

Feel free to make additions in the comments.

Douglas E. Lindner :: How to Fix the Political Media
Tags: , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Great points Doug (4.00 / 1)
I'd add:

Stop telling us about the same story every fifteen minutes for days at a time, especially when there was have been no new developments.

If you assume I didn't support a Dem in a national election because I didn't support them in the Primary, well, you are confusing me with someone who doesn't want to see Democrats elected.


Yo, Check It (4.00 / 1)


Whack-a-mole, anyone?

This one's better, Jack... (0.00 / 0)

Jeremy Scahill takes down Chuck Todd on "Real Time."

How can any journalist have the temerity to claim other journalists shouldn't investigate Blackwater's role in Iraq and Afghanistan because it constitutes "cable catnip" is beyond me and it's telling of Chuck Todd. Scahill did the right thing. Todd blamed Scahill for "sullying his integrity" as a journalist. Todd's wrong. Todd sullied himself.

I still can't understand why some Dems on this site speak well of him. I can remember people on this site thinking Todd would be such a good replacement for Tim Russert. How could anyone speak highly of him (or Russert for that matter)?


Real Journalists? (0.00 / 0)
Sounds like "Real Americans" to me.

Check it, yo. I use journalists, like I use movie reviewers. I go to the ones that have the same take on films, that I usually have.

That said, I am usually very aware of my own bias. That is why I use checks to my reality map. Hence, you! ;v)

Please don't harsh my mellow, baby.

Whack-a-mole, anyone?


[ Parent ]
It's not a matter of bias... (0.00 / 0)

... it's a matter of accuracy in reporting and challenging the statements that are made from government and military officials. It's about holding their feet to the fire, not stenography. Todd, and the late Tim Russert, were the opposite of that. For them it's about access. That compromises journalism IMO.  

[ Parent ]
Let me clarify... (0.00 / 0)

... Todd and the late Tim Russert are the opposite of challenging government, military, and even corporate officials.  


[ Parent ]
I agree (0.00 / 0)
(Hah!)

I don't know why people watch network news, or even most of cable news, for that matter.  Law and Order re-runs are preferable.  



"When you get to the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on."  Franklin D. Roosevelt    


[ Parent ]
#3. Not all news is in Washington. (0.00 / 0)
I appreciate Chuck Todd's analysis of political math, etc.  I think he's good for that.  But that's analysis, not journalism, and it's hugely important that people report on things like Blackwater, which is a perfect example of what should get more coverage than it does.

This leads to #4 as well.  We need more news and less analysis.

--
No tea; no decaf.

@DougLindner


[ Parent ]
Really? (0.00 / 0)

I'll never forget Chuck Todd's first question at Obama's first (or second) press conference. "Is consumer spending one of the main reasons that got us [in the recession] in the first place?" Econ 101 professors across the country must have picked that apart. Didn't Todd know that consumer spending is what jump starts the economy? I couldn't believe it.

The other horrible observation was when Todd referred conservative critics as "we" and Obama as "a Muslim leader" back in January. I remember reading it on Alternet and it just floored me that this guy has the job that he has.  


[ Parent ]
well... (0.00 / 0)
a strong case could made that it was irresponsible consumer spending that was a large contributor to our country's recent mortgage problems.

If you assume I didn't support a Dem in a national election because I didn't support them in the Primary, well, you are confusing me with someone who doesn't want to see Democrats elected.

[ Parent ]
With lots of help (0.00 / 0)
from an administration in DC under Bush that must have well understood that the economy was going in the shitter unless they could get enough uneducated consumers (uneducated in part because public education was not much of a priority for Reagan, etc.) to go deeply into debt to maintain, not increase, their standard of living because their wages were falling behind the cost of living.  Blaming the consumer is a very superficial diagnosis in this case, IMO.  The "ownership society" was not meant to help us out here, it was meant to keep the economy from going down.  Until the house of cards got too high, and the whole thing collapsed.  

We believe in prosperity & opportunity, strong communities, healthy families, great schools, investing in our future and leading the world by example. We are Democrats; we are the change you're looking for.

[ Parent ]
I didn't say anything about economic analysis. (4.00 / 1)
I just think he was better at counting delegates in 08 than many of his colleagues.

--
No tea; no decaf.

@DougLindner


[ Parent ]
counting counts. n/t (0.00 / 0)


for transparency sake ~I represent Union print shops

[ Parent ]
On a more serious note... (4.00 / 1)

*** Stop reading Twitter feedback on national television. ***

Yes! I'm amazed that news networks think this is valuable knowledge in the public interest. This is poor, lazy, and just dumb. Another reason why I won't subscribe to cable.

Horse race election coverage is another theme we have to get rid of. That dumbs down meaningful election coverage and trivializes an important event every two and four years.

Minor/fringe candidates should be treated just as seriously as say someone like Clinton, Obama, or Edwards. Russert's questions to Kucinich during one debate was petulant and unprofessional ("Dennis, have you ever seen a UFO?") or Carl Cameron's question to Ron Paul about the September 11th movement. No matter poorly one is doing in the polls, fundraising, etc., they don't deserve patronizing and petty questions to be asked at them. Another bad example was George Stephanopolous asking "Do you believe Jeremiah Wright loves America?"

There's more but I'll end it there. A very thoughtful piece, Doug.  


Thanks. The horse race point you're making, by the way, is my #4 above. (0.00 / 0)
They assume lesser-known and less well-funded candidates have no chance, and they make sure of it by denying them the coverage necessary to be better known and better funded.

--
No tea; no decaf.

@DougLindner


[ Parent ]
I place most of the blame (0.00 / 0)
for our grossly extended national campaign cycle squarely on the shoulders of the national (and to some extent local) media. In my opinion, this preposterous cycle is the primary cause of our government's inability to govern.

It's simple: campaigns are the golden-egg laying geese for these businesses. As much as it would be nice to think that they are in the service of the public interest, it just ain't so. And now, with all safety valves effectively bypassed by SCOTUS, it's only going to get worse.

Nice job summarizing the major issues, Doug.

Republicans believe government is bad - then they get into office and prove it.


RE: #1, #2, #4, #6, and #8 (0.00 / 0)
A hilarious and insightful piece from last night's Colbert about The Circle of Polling Punditry Meat.
(also, an interview with Scott Rasmussen)



--
No tea; no decaf.

@DougLindner



Connect with BH
     
Blue Hampshire Blog on Facebook
Powered by: SoapBlox