Published by Jane Devin on 10 Feb 2008 at 12:27 pm
Mainstream Media Peddles its Influence, Promotes Obama
I miss the days of objective, or even semi-objective, journalism. More than that, I resent its absence in 2008, as our scarred and embattled country faces its most important election in
decades.
I have never condoned the practice of newspaper editorial boards endorsing a candidate. Political favoritism should not, in my opinion, be part of any endeavor that claims to subscribe to the ethics of professional journalism.
The duty of the journalist is to further those ends by seeking truth and providing a fair and comprehensive account of events and issues. Conscientious journalists from all media and specialties strive to serve the public with thoroughness and honesty. - Preamble of the Ethics Code of the American Society of Professional Journalists.
It is not fair to the public when a newspaper, or other mainstream news source, under the guise of journalism, endorses a political candidate. It’s a peddling of influence, which trades on the trust and readership of subscribers, who typically rely on journalism to inform and educate them with facts — not opinion.
The media’s overwhelming support for Barack Obama has not only been apparent, but slavish. Headlines from sources as diverse as the Associated Press to NPR have practically screamed ultimate victory where none yet exists. Newspapers from all across the country are slanting their headlines towards “the underdog” and “the rock star of politics” — making liberal comparisons to a revered John F. Kennedy — while burying the facts of the delegate count, which currently favors Hillary Clinton.
Journalists should:
— Make certain that headlines, news teases and promotional material, photos, video, audio, graphics, sound bites and quotations do not misrepresent. They should not oversimplify or highlight incidents out of context.
— Test the accuracy of information from all sources and exercise care to avoid inadvertent error. Deliberate distortion is never permissible.
— Examine their own cultural values and avoid imposing those values on others.
— Distinguish between advocacy and news reporting. Analysis and commentary should be labeled and not misrepresent fact or context.
(From the ethics code of the American Society of Professional Journalists).
When a certain bent by a news organization is clear and expected, such as the Huffington Post’s lean towards the left, or the right-wing slant of Fox News, the effect of biased reporting is not as devastating. Publications and broadcasts that cater to a niche market are unlikely to sway people either on the opposite side of the political spectrum, or in the moderate middle.
However, mainstream news does have the power and influence to sway moderate and undecided public opinion, and this is apparent in polls taken during and after major media blitzes. When mainstream media gears up their political machine, and promotes one candidate as a front-runner — even when not supported by the present, factual evidence — a substantial number in the public show a propensity to believe that other candidates, perhaps their candidate of choice, are somehow out of the running.
The loss of objective reporting during political seasons is unconscionable to me, and I can only hope that there are enough voters who see beyond the smoke and mirrors of skewed coverage and journalistic favoritism to vote their true conscience — and not be influenced by the mainstream media’s obvious and well-crafted popularity contest.
Rebecca F. on 10 Feb 2008 at 4:52 pm #
Okay, well…..first, I’m kinda thrilled that the media is siding with Obama, and you know how I feel about HRC. Second though, I begrudgingly agree with your point about favoritism in the media which has been totally the rule for the last eight years.
Still Jane, I think you’re wrong wrong WRONG in supporting Hill, but I know that I’m not going to change your mind anymore than you’ll change mind. So I’ll keep reading, waiting for Barack to take the nomination, and then I’ll wait on all those really nice articles you’ll write about him.
Alison on 10 Feb 2008 at 5:08 pm #
Until the networks stop treating news as a form of entertainment with ratings and ad revenue and shareholder profit being paramount, nothing will change. Also, it’s disturbing to hear how often network newscasts and investigative news programs have had to postpone or bury stories altogether because of pressure and threats from the Bush administration. How many scandals that we came to learn about were ones the networks or newspapers knew of but sat on until independent leaks would ultimately force them to address an issue? I hope one day we’ll ditch the bubbly, chatty, giggly news anchors we now have for the serious-minded, even glum newscasters of yore. I’m sure we didn’t get all the facts then either, but at least the news was delivered in a respectably intelligent format to an audience that wanted to be educated with facts. Amy Goodman on Democracy Now is a prime example of a true journalist with courage major integrity.
Alison on 10 Feb 2008 at 5:24 pm #
Oh, RebeccaF, since I just saw you had posted, let me be the first to tell you I am now an official convert to Obama. Since my original favorite, Edwards, got sidelined by the media I have been paying closer attention to both Hillary and Obama. I don’t dislike Hillary at all but I have really seen Obama grow in stature from what I first saw in the earliest debates. He really does make me feel like I could once again feel connected to and proud of the US in a way that Hillary and Bill aren’t as convincing of. Obama’s clinching line for me was “This election is not about the past, it’s about the future”.
Rebecca F. on 10 Feb 2008 at 8:06 pm #
BWWAAAAAAHHHHAAAAAHHAAA……….
Dees is how we get you, one at a time!
LOL. Just kiddin’. Love that you’re an idealist like me Alison. And sorry Edwards didn’t get as much coverage as he should have. Maybe he’ll be chosen as a VP?
John Mc. on 11 Feb 2008 at 3:32 am #
Rebecca and Alison, glad to join you in support of Obama (Rebecca, you know we’re tight, right?? LOL). Jane, just wanted to put in $.02 or so worth of comment.
I understand your frustration at the ‘horserace’ aspect of the media and its shallow analysis of the campaigns, but I honestly can’t begrudge Obama’s current status as somewhat golden, when for nearly a year he was hardly considered viable by the media. His story, his successes and his remarkable cross-section of support from one end of the country to the other is nothing less than astonishing.
That Hillary is doing so well, her gender aside, is not such a compelling story since she was the presumptive nominee (much to my chagrin last summer). She has continued to reap the effects—positive and negative—of her name, reputation and record. What is clear to me through the campaign process is that where Obama has had the time and money to wage a compaign to connect with voters and get his message out, he has usually won. As a California resident, I understand and expected the outcome here, based on the historical connections of the Clintons to the Democratic Party machinery and many of the ethnic communities in this state, and the lack of time for Obama to overcome those ties. Still, all in all, I thought he did very well across the state.
Frankly, it had left me curious that so many seemed willing to set aside the baggage of the Clinton I administration and the AK years and Hillary’s presumed involvement in the aiding and abetting of her husband’s follies, the Clintons’ unapologetic attachments to so many donors and supporters that brought their integrity into question, and then her failure of judgment and leadership in confronting GWB on the Iraq vote, and even more importantly (to me) her continuing support and refusal to pull back from that stance for so long.
Rebecca F. on 11 Feb 2008 at 6:38 am #
Oh, I’m all about the O, my man John.
And so MANY are now all about the O, too. The O will soon rule the world….Or at least this corner of it.
It’s going to be such a peaceful world.
Patty G. on 11 Feb 2008 at 7:14 am #
When I was a teenager in high school back in the mid 60’s, I took a journalism class. The basic format in journalism was: “to report facts and the opinions of others and to leave your own opinions out of the story. The term for introducing your own opinion into a story is called editorializing.”
During those years, I remember when President Kennedy was assassinated, and listening to the reporter on air giving the world updates. Everyone was grasping for the next words about what happened to President Kennedy and at no time was there speculation, or personal opinions. They reported facts and if they didn’t have it, they waited until they could report the facts to the public. This is true, fair and basic journalism.
Barbara Walters is a prime example of basic journalism. Although I am not a big fan of hers, but I do respect her when it comes to her experience in reporting the facts and leaving out personal opinions when interviewing people around the world. Tom Brokow is another excellent journalist, as well as many other “old” timers of the years past.
The media is becoming “mini” Entertainment Tonight” people just filling up TV time with their own personal opinions.
Our brains soak up everything we hear from outside sources. If you hear it enough times you tend to believe what we hear. I am from the “old” school and that is you go to the source for the information you need. My source is watching the debates and listening to every word they have to say, their actions and reactions, their walk, their speeches, etc.
One particular issue I have is when one of the candidates mentioned in one of the debates the fact they can’t hold onto paperwork. I thought immediately this would be a problem as they would have to rely on someone else to hand them everything. It’s a small issue, but a big one for me!
I am very nervous about this upcoming election. What is happening is “history in the making” it worries the heck out of me “big time”. Based on where the USA stands right now, I am more for a “comfort” feeling of stability based on past experiences than I am for the “unknown”.
Doris Rose MacBean on 11 Feb 2008 at 10:54 am #
Another well thought-out piece about our “news” coverage and media. Since I am spending more and more time reading opinions and listening to pundits, I am forced into the uncomfortable position of using some rusty, critical thinking skills. I, too, am a John Edwards supporter and have been since his first run. I also believe that he left the race prematurely because of inadequate coverage of his campaign.
I have been thoroughly impressed by many of the Democratic candidates and agree with many that Clinton/ Obama would be a dream team. I am impressed with the Obama’s positive, enthusiastic view of the future and feel secured by the determined steady hand of Hillary Clinton (who got my primary vote). I will vote for either one in order to get a Democrat in the White House–at all costs. That, in my opinion, is the most important goal.
I hope we do not get so caught up in the need to squabble and be divisive (as we have been for the last seven years, or longer) that we lose sight of our goal. We need a change of direction, desperately. I think the most important thing we can do now is avoid complacency and make sure that everyone continues this tidal wave of change so that the voter turnout will ensure a positive result with no ambiguity and no chance of election fraud.
Thanks Jane for keeping an eye on the target.
And where is Walter Cronkite when you need him?
Laurie on 11 Feb 2008 at 6:14 pm #
Sometimes I don’t comment because I’m just so blown away by all the other comments, and how smart the people who gather here are…I am just in awe of all of you who have really taken the time to know the issues so well and who can stand by their opinions with such a clear grasp on the facts.
LOL. That’s really all I can contribute. I’m listening to everything, trying to take it all in, and make the best decision possible.
I agree with John about the Clinton baggage, and I wonder too how I’ll feel with another Clinton at the helm. Not that I didn’t like Bill, because I did. It was just all the side issues that distracted. I blame the republicans for much or most of it, but in the end it was Bill’s actions that started it.
So I’m torn. A woman I know has experience and would probably do well, even if her past was imperfect, and a man I don’t know much about but who is saying everything I want to hear.
I wish I knew who their VP choices were. That might make it easier.
Laurie on 11 Feb 2008 at 6:16 pm #
Oh, Patty G., I wanted to say I totally agree about the Entertainment aspect of the News. It’s probably part of the reason I’m having the hard time I’m having!
Doris. I would also feel so much better if Hillary & Barack teamed up. Chances don’t look good though, do they?
Barbara on 11 Feb 2008 at 6:50 pm #
Doris, you have hit the nail on the head about the squabbling.! I am so sick of it! I know that there will be disagreements, but now seems like a time to come together, not pull apart. Unfortunately, there’s so much feeling out there, that I fear the worst. I fear some of HRC’s supporters will be so disappointed if she doesn’t get the nod, that they’ll stay home, or worse, vote McCain. Ditto, but worse, if Obama is out. People will cry fould play because the media has already pretty much declared him the nominee.
It’s just not starting off well!
Lonnie on 11 Feb 2008 at 7:44 pm #
I found this post and links on huffpo, hope it’s okay to post them here. (If not just delete and no hard feelings). The poster’s name was Hinnis, and it looks like he did his homework. Now I have to do some more too!
“Because of the honeymoon Obama has had with the press, most Americans don’t know very much about him. For example, most Americans have no idea how Obama won his first State Senate seat by stabbing his friend and patron, Alice Palmer, in the back and having her disqualified for the ballot. Most have no clue as to the connection between Obama and Tony Rezko, the slumlord, who has given Obama upwards of $200,000 over the last several years, and who has now been indicted. Most don’t realize that once Obama was elected to the Senate, he supported the war in all votes UNTIL he ran for president. Most have no knowledge of Obama’s self-described mentor and spiritual advisor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, who espouses an arguably racist Christian theology and who gave Louis Farrakhan (the white and Jew hater) a lifetime achievement award several months ago. You can bet the Republican slime machine is aware of these things. Please, learn more about Obama before you make this crucial decision.
(Note: Some of the links below must be copied and pasted to your browser to work.)
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-070403obama-ballot,0,1843097.story?,page=1
http://www.huliq.com/47109/meet-press-hillary-examines-sen-obama-iraq
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/taylor-marsh/obamas-faustian-bargain-_b_82863.html.html
http://www.tucc.org/about.htmwww.youtube.com/watch?v=jxPA37n0oOU
http://www.newmediajournal.us/staff/rush/2007/print/02202007.htm
http://www.suntimes.com/news/brown/757286,CST-NWS-brown24.article
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uXS_YrYp07Q
Alison on 11 Feb 2008 at 8:47 pm #
Lonnie,
If you put anybody in politics, including Reverend Huckabee, under a microscope, nobody is without his or her share of unflattering deeds and unsavory associations. I’d say very few get far without stepping on toes in that profession and you’re dealing with large egos and generally people with a penchant for enjoying power and acclaim. We have to choose from the array of candidates we have and in the grand scheme of things the points you raise may be of some worthwhile interest (probably somewhat exaggerated for effect), but pale by comparison to the crimes against our country and beyond that the Bush administration is guilty of. And they’re still allowed to run things without even the threat of impeachment. When I heard Rezko had been arrested my first thought was that it was politically motivated to use him as leverage to gain dirt on Obama. The timing seemed very suspicious for a guy who’s been so high profile and politically connected for so long. I think having had a white mother and grandparents we can safely assume Obama doesn’t hate white people. I’ll grant you the war funding votes are a means of supporting a war, and I wish he hadn’t, but nobody has a perfect voting record and too often they all vote to appease a special interest or as a career chess move. I’m willing to look at Obama’s shorter time spent in DC as a net positive. Fewer enemies, fewer friends expecting favors, less entrenched in the culture of insiders completely immersed in their own world while we all get neglected.
LBJ on 11 Feb 2008 at 10:36 pm #
That is terrible that Obama’s minister gave an award to Farrakhan. I see that Obama did not agree with it, but he didn’t change ministers either, and has nothing but high praise for him outside of this. It’s disturbing to me that anybody would support someone who supported Farrahkhan……..
Jane, your friendship article said you wouldn’t give up a friend because of something they said that you disagreed with. I think, wouldn’t you give up someone who gave an award to an anti-semite? I would, and I’m not even jewish. I find it scary. I think there’s a lot we don’t know about Obama yet.
Man, I don’t really like any of the nominees. Is it too late for Gore?
Lonnie on 11 Feb 2008 at 11:31 pm #
Alison, I agree with your spirit, but disagree with some of your assumptions. No, I don’t know how BO feels about white people, but I would never assume that because he’s got a white mother he’s not a racist. To use a very poor example (qualifying so you don’t think I’m comparing, I’m not just making a point), Hitler’s father was Jewish.
And I couldn’t agree with you MORE on Bush, and the crimes his administration has committed. I have written letters, like thousands have, asking for impeachment. More than that, I want a trial. I want the true facts out there.
That’s why it has become so important to me that this election be right. That we know as much as its possible to know about each candidate, and get the dirt as well as the polish. The evidence against Rezko is pretty overwhelming. Obama himself said the deal he struck with him was “bone-headed” and has since donated $37,000 of Rezko’s campaign contribution to charity. Yet, what if he wasn’t caught? What then? And, as LBJ points out, what about this link to Farrankhan? I’ll tell you Alison, that scares the shit out of me! The last thing this country needs right now is more racial, anti-semitic politicking, which is what we’ll get if, even through association, we get all the Farrankhan and Sharpton types demanding this and that after the election.
There is a growing movement against Israel in this country, coming from the leftest of liberals, which is why I can no longer align myself totally with the left, which seems to have only the vaguest grasp on history or religious conflicts. The words “Zionism” is being thrown around as if a free and prosperous Israel is an evil, while support for Palestinians is growing. This, despite Palestine’s treacherous past, advocacy of suicide bombings, cheers for 9-11, and more. Everytime Israel has given them an inch, they’ve gone ballistic trying to get five miles. Needless to say, I support Israel. I believe we need them, and at least on stable, democratic force in the Middle East.
I need to know more about BO’s stance on Israel, and I need to know more about his own personal and political beliefs. Right now, he’s just emulating great speeches. He wants to be President. I guess I want to know why. I want the mask removed, and I want to know who’s under there.
Kendall A. Johnson on 21 Feb 2008 at 5:07 pm #
The mainstream media’s favortism of Obama has gone beyond the pale. No one in the media has taken a responsible position and vetted this candidate, who is after all , is running for president. Instead, the mainstream media has acted like they were the popstar judges on a season of American Idol. They have had a frightening love affaire with Senator Obama that does no one any favors. He is now on the brink of clinching the democtratic nomination and no one knows his accomplishments, his flaws, his positions, or most importantly, his plans for leading our country.
Almost as disturbing, is the mainstream media’s contempt for Senator Clinton and the role this contempt has played in the media’s irresponsible willingness to blatently ignore Obama’s substantive shortcomings. They have deliberately and dangeriously manipulated the public’s opinoin of these candidates without engaging in any substance what so ever.
Whether you like Clinton or not, it has been undeniably clear that the mainstream media has engaded in a character assassination of her. They have routinely down played, if not ignored, her successes and have blown her failures out of proportion. In doing so they have ruthlessly and unjustifiably turned the public against her.
The most daming endictement of all, is the utter control of image that the media has over the most important issues and events of the day. Essentially, they maintain the unfettered power over public perseption. If this is not frightening enough, to know how irresponsible the mainstream media has been in their coverage of this primary seaon, is to understand how flawed and fragile our system for picking our leaders actually is.