Liberal media

Lots of bloggers think it, I dunno. I do see it as a major lack of the whole “objectivity” thing, not sure on which side. Actually, I do have an opinion. I have an opinion! But let me explain what I’m talking about first.

War on Iraq. For years we’ve thought, gee, wish we could get rid of this Saddam fellow. Then someone says, “let’s get rid of Saddam” and suddenly the media is all very much against it.

I don’t care if its a good idea or not, what I can’t understand is why NO ONE on television, print, radio, whatever can put forth a good story on why we shouldn’t be attacking Iraq, oh, and also…maybe why we should? Cause apparently 70% of Americans would like to…and the news doesn’t want to admit it.

Instead of blaming it on a liberal bias that I just don’t see, I would look to what I learned last semester in Socolow’s great News on Screen class about how today’s press doesn’t like covering anything unless its being debated by politicians.

Basically, there is no “dissent” in the public (represented by the media) until a leader objects. War on terror? Unified as good. Until Tom Daschle comes out and says…maybe not so good. Then there are stories on that.

A few politicos said war, the rest called them warmongers, and there we go, easy way to slant the coverage. When every politician is saying its bad, and a few are saying its good, and no one is saying WHY its good, and a lot are saying WHY its bad, that is obviously what the news is going to report.

Neat how that works, huh?

Maybe some Republocrats should throw a big press shindig and talk about all the evils of Iraq and what we could do and why we’d do it and what it would accomplish. Might change the tone of the news coverage a bit.

2 replies on “Liberal media”

  1. I’m not sure what you are asking for here; Do you want "the media" to put forth editorials as opposed to utilizing "experts" to give their opinions? I’ve seen security experts on TV telling us why Saddam must be destroyed as well as lots of coverage of peaceniks protesting at various places. I don’t think there are any protesters saying "Kill Saddam" right now or else that would be on the air. I’d rather my news not editorialize and instead just report things that happen.

    As for no one saying "WHY it’s good" I don’t know if I agree or disagree. Bush is up making lots of speeches all the time about that it’s good, but I don’t know if that would classify really as saying why it’s good. He seems to think "We have evidence, but it’s super top secret. Trust me" is going to fly over with the american people. Do his speeches count as a big press shindig?

    If I were him, I would just show the evidence and then bombard people with clips of nuclear devastation and footage from the chemical weapons tests on the Kurds. Scaring people emotionally is sadly far more effective than a rational argument.

    I think we all still think "gee, wish we could get rid of this Saddam fellow." We just want to have a good excuse to appease the international community (or at least the important people in it). Kuwait was a good excuse, but we blew it. Now if only we could "find" some evidence linking him with 9/11…

  2. Yeah, what Bush is doing is blowing it through his general incoherance. Maybe all his speechwriters and people have just gotten really tired of him.

Comments are closed.