If Obama shows up somewhere, or the first lady for that matter, there seems to be this big, did he do a "no-no" concerning the color of his tie, or did the lady offend by breaking tradition because she shook hands differently than someone else did.
This big media judging with these useless bits of trivia, and taking polls on it, etc. I find myself not clicking on a lot of links in the news due to it looking like they are trying to obscure the important matters with this useless junk.
Like I said in an early post, the pham and insurance industries do not want any changes made re: health care, and there seems to be enough money in their kittys to prevent any HCR. I guess I am becoming jaded too.
Expect plenty of disagreement. Just keep it civil.
- Posts: 4384
- Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2003 10:48 am
- Location: The Reality-Based Community
David R. Modny wrote:One more thing that I wanted to touch upon, and then I'm out:
As much as I would like to see a narrative that we control, I don't think it's that easy. That is, we sometimes have a very insulated view from the Left. For example, I distinctly remember right after one of Obama's HCR speeches for the country, he made an appearance on Letterman. Next thing you know, CNN has a poll stating that "a majority of Americans feel Obama risks overexposure on health care." That's the crux of it. It's almost as if it's not our "birthright" to be as forceful as the Right. For every "sick child" commercial that we might run on HCR, the cries of "Socialism" and "quit trying to ram this down our throat" would be part of the national dialogue. In that regard, I'm convinced that the 24 news cycle, the never-ending polls and punditry, and the internet in general are as much responsible for why we can't get anything done in this country. It's the cart leading the horse, and it's what now shapes public opinion. Information is good, but oversaturation is insufferable. If all this had been around during FDR, I shudder to think what *wouldn't* have been accomplished.
Furthermore, I guess I'm just starting to get jaded enough to believe that the corporate media would never *let* us control the narrative. The machine on the Right would probably be given just as large a counter-attack platform and, more importantly, a platform that would be propped up by that same media. In that regard, if the Dems idea of health care reform was simply trying to give a sick child an extra, government subsidized lollipop at the doctor's office, *it* might be labeled Obamacare and Socialism [exaggeration mode off].
You are absolutely right that the media will always tend toward the sort of corporate-friendly know-nothing sensationalism that benefits the right far more than the left. I honestly don't think they are consciously biased that way (except for Fox, of course) -- they just tend to be loud and stupid and that lends itself more to the tea party message.
So the contest is indeed always handicapped. I still think the Dems never defined HCR clearly enough to give it a decent shot at overcoming the handicap. Plus ca change...
RQOTW: "I'll make sure that our future is defined not by the letters ACLU, but by the letters USA." -- Mitt Romney
Rspaight wrote:...the media will always tend toward the sort of corporate-friendly know-nothing sensationalism that benefits the right far more than the left.
Indeed. Cue the teabaggers.