Letters to the Editor
-
Overlander:
...the most irrelevant statistic imaginable: Hillary's percentage popular vote margin over Obama.
Sheesh.
-- overlander
That is the most irrelevant statistic that you can imagine? Sheesh.
-
Chris Matthews wondering aloud if he should go home...
...was the most intelligent thing I've ever heard him say.
I also loved his further exchange with Brokaw, when he defended his obsession with polls by saying that a lot of universities rely on these polls for their "branding." Chris Matthews, academic benefactor!!
Anyway, is "branding" really the business universities are supposed to be in? And isn't most polling done by private-sector firms, including, of course, NBC?
Keith Olbermann was no prize, either. After devoting a good chunk of his Monday night show to writing off Hillary as a candidate (he pretty much predicted she'd lose New Hampshire in a big way, and then pointed out that no candidate has recovered from the one-two punch of losing both Iowa and NH, and then hauled out some "experts" to back up his postulating), he then snarkily asked every Clinton supporter he interviewed last night if they "seriously" were trying to "pretend" this was a comeback by Hillary, presumably because she used to be viewed as the frontrunner. Yes, Keith, it was a comeback -- and in light of the media hysteria to consign her campaign to the political dustbin, it was one of Lazarus-like proportions.
Ironically, it was the Hillary haters in the media -- with Chris Matthews (who seems incapable of saying her name without working either "strident" or "shrill" into the sentence) leading the pack -- who made this such a spectacular comeback. Had they merely reported the poll results and moved on -- instead of rampantly speculating if her campaign was over/she would drop out/she would fire all her staff/she would retire to Elba -- her victory still would have been surprising in light of the polls, but it wouldn't have had nearly the drama that it did.
You know what word I heard only once in all the coverage last night? WRONG. As in, we were WRONG. To paraphrase the Munchkins: We weren't merely nearly wrong, we really were sincerely wrong.
The only person I heard say it, astonishingly, was Pat Buchanan!! And it's a pretty pathetic day when he's the voice of reason in the punditry profession.
Dan Abrams of MSNBC, whose show followed Olbermann's dismissal of Hillary on Monday night, was the only one I heard saying, "Hold on a minute -- maybe we shouldn't write Hillary off before, oh, I don't know, A SINGLE VOTE has been cast in ANY primary." Good for him. He was removed enough from the howling political-pundit pack to see things clearly. But what a sad commentary that he felt compelled to lead his show by pointing out what should have been obvious to any actual reporter.
But maybe losing Iowa was the best thing for Hillary, as she's now making herself more accessible to the media (maybe she should give them nicknames and pat them on the head, the way Bush did!!). Because it's obvious that you can't win the Presidency without winning the popularity contest among the Heathers (of both genders) who make up our press corps.
-
Hollywood-style news
Haven't we seen the same thing happen in Hollywood for the past decades?
There's so much money involved in making movies nowadays - movies that should appeal to as many people as possible - that every kind of risk or challenge is automatically edited out, just to make sure nobody is offended and stays away.
MSM work the same way. They cost so much that nothing is said or shown that would put off possible consumers and threaten maximum revenue. (Journalists are "stars" now too.)
Further more it's based on the false assumptions that democratic news coverage (1) only means reaching as many people as possible (2) people are generally stupid and would not understand more complex or challenging issues and (3) they should and cannot be educated, or at least, that that is not MSM's task.
It has become an industry, just like any other. And the consuequences are an alarmingly rising inflation of democracy.
PS: Just check out Michael Mann's "The insider" too for a grate take on this: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0140352/
-
Kitt, re: your comment at 5:57
I agree with you about the condescension behind that "reasoning."
However, I do think it's possible that Hillary's expression of emotion did make a difference to late-deciders, and maybe even to some who changed their minds.
But it would have been because in that moment she exposed the press's cynicism for what it was, by saying that the election is not just a game, that it's about people's lives. You'd never know that from reading any of the coverage.
What else could any thinking, sentient person, comparing her heartfelt statement with the jaded press coverage, think? Or do? If they had still been undecided, perhaps they were still comparing Hillary with the other candidates, trying to decide where to stand in history. By itself, Hillary's emotional moment might not have meant much, but contrasted with the coverage, it did. I know I was moved by it, and I'm not even a primary Hillary supporter. But I'm still pleased that her wake overturned the press's dinghy.
-
@ Kitt
That is the most irrelevant statistic that you can imagine? Sheesh.
I'll be happy to vote for Obama if he's the nominee, and I'm glad his supporters are so passionate about him but it's the same reason Pauliacs make me nervous. Cult of personality.
-
Political "Journalism"
This is a great commentary about political "journalism" today. Chris Matthews sucks, and gets worse every day. He's a pundit, not a journalist. Just because he believes something, doesn't mean "the common folks" believe it too. I hate to say it, but Keith Olbermann's reaction to Hillary's "teary-eyed moment" was also obnoxious. They all assumed we'd be put off by it. Hillary ISN'T Muskie and it's 2008. We've all come a long way. At the N.H. debates, Clinton spoke about the issues with a depth the other candidates didn't match. Maybe the voters were responding to that. Maybe voters there like all the Democrats and don't actually hate Hillary.