WORLD Magazine Library powered by Amazon
Term Life Insurance at Savings up to 75%!
Logos Bible Software for Bible Study
Learn it! Speak it! Live it!
Free Hardcover ESV Study Bible!
Dollars for abortion: The House considers a bill allowing local funding of abortions in D.C. 
The media loves this election
Over at The XX Factor, where “Slate women blog about politics,” Dahlia Lithwick makes a good point about the media’s involvement with this election.
Hillary Clinton has somehow decided she’s running against us. Between this Hillary-versus-the-media meme and the Obama/messiah silliness, we in the media may have finally managed the inconceivable: The entire focus of the primary race has officially become ourselves. It reminds me of that old joke: But enough about me, what do you think of me?
I’m guessing the media love this, even if they won’t admit it. Just about every human being loves power, and this election is pointing out the media’s power, reinforcing for many journalists the original reasons that many of them got into journalism: to have some kind of effect on the world.
back to top18 Comments to “The media loves this election”
Lithwick must be pretty young. I believe that the focus of elections has been the media for a very long time. The power they wield is ridiculously out of proportion.
Report comment to moderator
The media only have as much power as we give them.
Report comment to moderator
I dont know how many journalists got into the biz to effect the world. Could there be power hungry types in the 4th estate who want not just to report events but shape and possibly alter them?
Nope. The US mainstream media is for the most part Joe Friday types who want only the facts.
They’d never inject their own biases. That would get in the way of the story, right Professor Olasky?
Report comment to moderator
Harrison, why all the media focus on Obama/Clinton? Might the R folks take a hint and gin up a few debates between Huckabee and McCain??
There’s no such thing as bad publicity.
Report comment to moderator
Kbells, brilliant! You are so right.
Report comment to moderator
Speaking of McCain (who is Obama anyway?) have you heard the “natural born citizen” controversy over his birth in the canal zone? I predict that this will be a non-issue unless he’s elected president – then we’d never hear the end of it.
http://tinyurl.com/yno4lu
Report comment to moderator
KBells may be right, but too many people give the media the power by default. Too many people are easily pulled around with a ring in their nose by not thinking for themselves. The media knows this and exploits it.
Report comment to moderator
#7. This is unfortunately truer of young people. They have an over inflated sense of their own importance because the media courts them. If only they knew the reason they are catered to is that they are more susceptible to emotional manipulation, have a low sales resistance and an insecure need to be accepted.
Report comment to moderator
“Just about every human being loves power, and this election is pointing out the media’s power, reinforcing for many journalists the original reasons that many of them got into journalism: to have some kind of effect on the world.”
Well, I largely ignore the media, and find the incessant, sensational, breathless reporting of just about anything to fill air time or print space to be a bit ridiculous. Most of what happens in the world, frankly, isn’t that exciting or sensational, and trying to make it seem so is, to me, annoying.
But I have to say, that getting into journalism “to have some kind of effect on the world” seems a completely valid reason.
How many people do you know who do not choose their profession because they hope to have an effect on the world? Whether you choose to be an engineer, a stay-at-home-mom, a lawyer, a preacher or even – gasp – a journalist, other than to earn money, you certainly hope your career will affect the world.
Report comment to moderator
Yes, Thomas, people enter the careers you have listed to “change the world.” A lawyer must, however, follow a rule book to achieve his/her goal of representing a client. The rule book for journalists has traditionally been to provide the facts and let people decide, not bend the facts or omit them or invent them when writing an article. Opinion used to be on the op-ed page. May I suggest that you listen to the commmecials for an upcoming news program. It’s all designed excite. The news should be news, not a product. Rule 1 for lawyers is “fundamental fairness.” The media, journalists, would do well to follow that same rule.
Report comment to moderator
Make It Man: Yeah, I heard about it (the McCain is not eligible to be president because he was born on a U.S military installation in Panama).
Undoubtably just another bit of stinking garbage floating out of the left-wing sewer (note it is originating in the NY Times according to the link I chased). This is the level they play. We should be used to it, by now.
And for those not yet used to it, just wait – in a year or two you will see yet new lows reached in slander and sleaze.
Report comment to moderator
The entire focus of the primary race has officially become ourselves. — The XX Factor
This Writing 101 example shows how the passive voice can produce an assertion which can’t withstand scrutiny when you specify an actor. Some people in the media write about what people say about the media, a few entirely, but many others don’t.
Harrison suggests that because all persons love power, all persons in “the media” love being the sole object of everyone’s attention, but are ashamed to admit it. This is way over the top. Presumably, Harrison thinks The NYTimes wrote about McCain’s relationship with a lobbyist because the reporters and editors love to have people talking about The Times’ affronts.
Harrison reveals that many journalists want to have “some kind of effect on the world.” Further news flash: ineffectual people often display sour grapes and snobbery against those who dare get out of their place. Harrison essentially tells us that many people in the media are too stupid to understand the difference between fame and importance, and would rather attain the former. I didn’t realize his antipathy ran so deep!
Report comment to moderator
I’m guessing the media love this, even if they won’t admit it. Just about every human being loves power, and this election is pointing out the media’s power, reinforcing for many journalists the original reasons that many of them got into journalism: to have some kind of effect on the world.
Would that include HSK and his fellow Worldmag writers?
Report comment to moderator
“Well, I largely ignore the media, and find the incessant, sensational, breathless reporting of just about anything to fill air time or print space to be a bit ridiculous.”
Just a bit?
And despite what NJL says, the news is a product. Shouldn’t be, but it is. It’s a commodity bought and sold. And that’s why it’s “incessant, sensational, breathless,” and “ridiculous” – not to mention much of it being inane.
No I’m not cynical. Not a bit. And Murphy was an optimist.
Report comment to moderator
People can bring up McCain’s birthplace but cannot bring up Obama’s middle name? It figures.
Report comment to moderator
Kyle A.
Among the germanic-Americans of previous generations were many, many little boys named Adolf who did not grow up to invade other countries or wield terrible weapons. Nevertheless, it seems, the awful history of a man named Adolf would make you feel justified in mocking anybody with the same name, as does the history of the man named Hussein.
Polite people used to respect the freedom of others to style their own names. First, middle. First, initial. Initial. initial. Initial, middle. First, initial, “nickname.” First alone. Middle alone. ETC. Polite don’t feel driven to impose their view of completeness and accuracy upon the names of others.
Teasing is a noble exercise. A Georgia congressman named Kingsley? says Republicans would stop saying “Hussein” if Democrats would stop getting irritated by it. Meanwhile, it’s too fun to resist. No wonder Jesus has switched over to the party of whores and tax collectors.
Report comment to moderator
I think our conservative friends give way too much credit to the media. If the media are so powerful and influential how does one explain that there are more conservatives than liberals in this country? I also think our conservative friends underestimate the ability of people to think for themselves and draw their own conclusions. I occasionally run into people who are too easily led and mindlessly parrot the “party line”, but most adults, no matter what their political persuasion, are far more nuanced and fluid in their thinking and beliefs. They’re not so dumb as to think that any side is pure as the driven snow. Their lives don’t revolve around the NY Times or the Weekly Standard.
Report comment to moderator
People can bring up McCain’s birthplace but cannot bring up Obama’s middle name? It figures.
Don’t play dumb, Kyle.
you know perfectly well if Obama’s middle name was Larry, nobody would mention it. It’s a low-class attempt to imply that he’s an enemy, playing on racism and fear.
Let’s try to have one election that’s not about our lower qualities, how about?
Report comment to moderator