Media 101
October 12, 2008 by victoria
Filed under Editorials
Let\’s face it. We\’ve got a rather sticky situation on our hands. The mainstream media has downright given up on objective reporting. They\’d rather be brainwashing the masses and beat around the bush than put real effort into their reporting.But what is the mainstream media? Kelley Beaucar Vlahos, a news columnist, defines the mainstream media is as “an unpopular place where the media is maligned by both ends of the political spectrum as biased, lazy, and agenda-driven. This reference invariably includes major newspapers and broadcast media.”
Let\’s take a current example: Barack Obama. Everyone, everywhere is enamored with Obama. Obama, Obama, Obama. His T-shirts are everywhere, his slogans are everywhere, yet no one seems to know why they back him. Most of his supporters believe and follow what the media tells them to, no questions asked.
The mainstream media has favored Obama since day one, even since the caucuses. MSNBC began nudging that, “Obama was the candidate for change,” though other more experienced democratic candidates had been campaigning for “change”. MSNBC reporter and Hardball host Chris Matthews stated while on air, that watching an Obama speech made, “thrills” run up his leg, regardless of the fact that his news program was meant to be objective.
After Obama had won the nomination, the issue of his pastor Jeremiah Wright surfaced. Wright had been known to preach anti-American rhetoric from the pulpit, including one particularly well-known remark: “Not God bless America, God D*mn America”. But did the media probe Obama on how he could have sat through 20 years worth of sermons from the same pastor without believing any of it? Instead of reporting, the media just brushed Rev. Wright under the mat. By the time the mainstream media reported on Wright\’s sermons, 42 out of 50 states had already voted in the primaries.*
Obama has also been known for his shady friends and acquaintances, like Tony Rezko and William Ayers. In the late 60\’s, Ayers was part of a radical organization that bombed federal buildings, including the Pentagon. Up until the last week, no one had questioned Obama\’s relationship with William Ayers and today\’s issue of The Washington Post went so far as to call Ayers “A former radical”.
But it doesn\’t stop there. What about Obama\’s sexist comment to a female reporter, saying, “Hold on sweetie. we\’ll hold a Press avail” in reference to her question about helping American auto workers? What about Obama referring to Palin as a “pig with lipstick”? What about a misinformed Obama who said that there was no Al-Quadea in Iraq pre-invasion?
What about his running mate, Joe Biden, telling the paraplegic governor of Missouri to “Stand Up Chuck”? What about Biden\’s remark that “Obama is not ready and the presidency doesn\’t lend itself on-the-job training”? The media trivializes Biden\’s “gaffes”, but not McCain\’s or Palin\’s. Why is this so?
Will the media ever cover these issues? Simply put, not likely because it doesn\’t fit into their new approach to journalism, or rather their “agenda”.
On the other hand, the media has been scrutinizing the Republican VP candidate, Sarah Palin. They have delved into her religion. They have dissected everything she has said. They have probed her “Bridge to nowhere” comment. They\’ve analyzed anything and everything to dig dirt on Palin. Why is this true about her and McCain but not about Biden and Obama? Could it be that they have a hidden agenda?
Could it be that the mainstream media has created a fantasy world based on rhetoric, devoid of any objectivity? Perhaps they would rather settle for “thrills” running up their legs than put some real effort into quality journalism.
*According to a report published by the Media Research Center in August 2008
This is from the Baron Banner Blogs, and not edited by the Baron Banner staff.
