There are some core essentials for choosing the leaders of a free society, one being the sturdy backbone of an informed electorate. Any republic or democracy will fail with clueless or apathetic voters.
Just as ours already has.
Informing citizenry is a shared responsibility. Individuals have to seek out political information, and the media must report on the workings of government, and elections.
Given the media's charge to cover government, I was dismayed to read on The New York Times political blog, The Caucus, that some presidential candidates will be barred from televised debates in New Hampshire.
As were we, but not surprised.
ABC News and Fox News decided to exclude from debates this weekend candidates deemed unelectable. David Chalian, the ABC News political director, told The New York Times that the network wants a production that showcases the "best conversation and debate between the candidates who really have a chance to become the nominee."
At least Chalian offered an explanation, however weak. Fox News never returned calls and e-mails sent by a number of news outlets.
So, why keep calling Fox "news?" Most of their shows are not listed as news shows in the TV Guide, which is published by news corps; owned by the same man who owns Fox, Rupert Murdoch. So, even Murdoch doesn't believe that Fox Noise is news.
So what criteria have ABC News and Fox News relied on to determine the electability of the next presidential contenders?
Fox News has invited what it must consider the five top contenders for the Republican nomination for a Sunday night debate. Left out are Reps. Ron Paul, R-Texas, and Duncan Hunter, R-Calif.
They don't like Ron Paul because he refuses to keep spouting the Bush propaganda about why 9/11 happened in the first place. Without that, the other Gooper campaigns don't make any more sense than the last 7 years have. Never mind that Paul has raised more money than any other Republican in the last quarter and is our-performing Fred Thompson. Why they excluded Hunter is anyone's guess, except that Hunter is sort of a one issue candidate: the Mexican invasion.
How can Fox News exclude Paul and include former Sen. Fred Thompson when Paul has more support in New Hampshire?
Is Thompson even running? It's difficult to tell if he is even breathing.
The limits employed by ABC News for its Republican and Democrat debates Saturday night are more bizarre. The network is letting candidates debate only if they finished in the top four of Thursday night's Iowa caucuses or if the candidates' support reaches 5 percent in national or New Hampshire polls.
ABC journalists have decided that the nation and New Hampshire will hear only from Iowa's favorite politicians. This Iowa benchmark coupled with the 5-percent cutoff will probably exclude serious candidates. It is questionable that Sens. Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., and Joseph Biden, D-Del., can meet the threshold.
Fox News and ABC News do voters a disservice by excluding serious candidates. Biden and Dodd probably will not win their party's nomination, or even win the New Hampshire primary. But they are statesmen who have the potential to influence the debate by forcing front-runners to speak about uncomfortable issues.
Exactly! Aren't campaigns supposed to be about ideas?
Paul should be allowed a seat on the GOP stage. His Libertarian message resonates in New Hampshire. The Texan also brings some glaring differences, like his opposition to the war, to a Republican stage dominated by fear-based foreign policy and immigration reform.
What might seem to journalists like a campaign that started during the Cold War is just heating up for the public. The first caucus was Thursday night, and the first primary is Tuesday. Many voters are still formulating their opinions about the candidates.
I doubt seriously that the New Hampshire voters, who are known for being some of the most informed in the country, are uninformed this year. They know what the candidates are about and probably did before the Iowa Caucus.
ABC News and Fox News are denying voters vital information by giving the big-moneyed candidates a platform to crow from. The networks' actions damage credibility with viewers and voters.
The corporate news medias' credibility has already been severely damaged in the last 7 years. This may be te year tat finally does them in. They have already opened the door for independent and a new kind of media to make great strides. We can only hope that they make more idiotic decisions. They will lose their rights as the 4th estate and the country will be better for it.
One reader of The Caucus wrote, "Never again will I believe an established media outlet!"
See what I mean? Wonder what took that reader so long?
I would not paint with such broad strokes, but what Fox News and ABC News have done worries me. The networks have managed to create doubts about their election coverage.
At this early stage of the campaign, voters need to hear from all the candidates. The media do democracy a disservice by tarnishing their role as facilitator.
Ryan Blethen's column appears regularly on editorial pages of The Times. His e-mail address is rblethen@seattletimes.com; for a podcast Q&A with the author, go to Opinion at seattletimes.com
Copyright © 2008 The Seattle Times Company
(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)
The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.
No comments:
Post a Comment