This post, from Tennessee Guerilla Women, sums up exactly my thoughts on the media.The amount of Clinton bashing in the S.C. primary coverage on MSNBC and CNN last night was astounding. What an amazing phenomenon. I don't recall ever seeing so much overt and shameless media bias in any previous election. I may as well be watching Fox News.
The vicious media bias against all things Clinton -- or against Hillary's bid for the presidency -- is not good for Obama or the Democratic Party. Eventually, the pack will turn on Obama; it's just a matter of time until they discover that he's human too. It may be naïve to think that anyone other than the media picks our candidates.Craig Crawford is one of the few journalists who is not running with the pack:
"You know, I have sat down here in Florida for the last month. And I have watched the coverage, and I really think the evidence-free bias against the Clintons in the media borders on mental illness. I mean, I think when Dr. Phil gets done with Britney [Spears], he ought to go to Washington and stage an intervention at the National Press Club.
I mean, we've gotten into a situation where if you try to be fair to the Clintons, if you try to be objective, if you try to say, "Well, where's the evidence of racism in the Clinton campaign?" you're accused of being a naïve shill for the Clintons. I mean, I think if somebody came out today and said that Bill Clinton -- if the town drunk in Columbia [South Carolina] came out and said, "Bill Clinton last night was poisoning the drinking water in Obama precincts," the media would say, "Ah, there goes Clinton again. You can't trust him." I really think it's a problem. You know what? You guys make him stronger with this bashing. This actually is what makes the Clintons stronger." -- read more
Vote for the worst political pundit over at TalkLeft.
7 comments:
I agree that the media reacts like it hasn't had its shots or meds when the subject is The Clintons.
I almost took your comments in a naughty direction considering that this fence rider has pundit crushes on both Craig Crawford and Rachel Maddow. Yowza!
You could take me along on THAT ride, DCup! ha
BAC
I do wonder if, given the rising role of identity-based voting in this election, the Hillary Clinton phenomenon makes certain people rather nervous.
Everyone accepts that black Americans have been rallying strongly to support Obama. But blacks are only about 13% of the US electorate.
But since women are a significant majority of the population that actually votes regularly, if the same sort of rallying-behind-one-of-our-own effect started to operate among women in anything even remotely like the way it has among blacks -- then we'd suddenly have a new 800-pound gorilla in the electoral jungle.
I think that idea is at the back of the minds of a lot of people who are comfortable with the way things are, and it bothers them. It would be too big, too disruptive, too unpredictable.
The irony is that the resulting incessant Hillary-bashing is, if anything, making the very thing they fear more likely to happen.
I would agree with Infidel, if this identity based voting weren't just a media creation in itself. Men, women, black, and white voters voted for Clinton and Obama and Edwards all. As much as the media would like to classify these candidates in easy stereotype, it is much more complicated.
As far as the media bias, I completely agree that they have been harder on her. The problem is that she has a public history that gives her pluses and negatives with the media and public at large that her opponents, who haven't been in the public eye as long, don't have.
Everyone here knows how I feel about this, but for those in the back who haven't paid attention: I am in complete accord with BAC.
So, I'm not going to rehash. I want to comment on Rachel Maddow. I agree with BAC. Rachel Maddow is essential listening for a number of reasons. Unlike 99.9% most of the pundit-ocracy, she holds a doctorate (from Oxford, I believe) in political science. She's also a real FAN OF THE GAME. So, she applies her considerable knowledge to interpret current events on the fly. While Ms. Maddow is out of the closet as a lesbian and certainly self-identifies as a "feminist" and a "progressive," she's equally well schooled in all of political theory and poltical economy and has no discernible bias beyond a broad-based sense of what a social democratic capitalist republic should aspire to. She does this with wit and without rancor, preaching, or condescension. Just watch her appearances with Pat Buchanan if you don't believe.
She may be the finest political pundit the USA has but most Americans are too caught up in the moment to notice.
I guess that it is a matter of perspective. I feel that the coverage for Obama has been hopeless skewed. In Nevada the press repeatedly ran Bill Clinton talking about the lawsuit against the Culinary Worker's Union without a reaction from the Obama camp, nor did they mention that all parties concerned (including Hillary) agreed to the conditions months before.
Usually the media focuses on what Hillary says about issues, whereas every Obama segment is prefaced with some kind of "too-black-not-black-enough" statement - I don't hear the same focus Hillary's gender. (Not that there should be. Neither should be an issue.) Also, Hillary is the DNC Party favorite - It is kind of hard to think of her as the "underdog." I am a big fan of Rachel Maddow, BTW.
Just my opinion - I don't pretend to be right or wrong. Also, I will of course vote for Hillary if she is the Democrtaic Presidential candidate. If Obama is doing nothing else, he is keeping Hillary on her toes.
Dr Z:
Though I disagree with you about the bias, I really appreciate your clear presentation of your viewpoint.
I agree with you about a couple of things, also. Rachel Maddow, obviosuly. You are right that HRC is still very much the favorite in the race. You are also right that Obama has kept her on her toes. I think she's definitely picked up some stylistic flourishes from him and she's kept him on the Democratic reservation, when you know his instinct is to jump into McCain/Lieberman land. Both will be helped by a vigorous fight, not hurt.
Post a Comment