Friday, August 29, 2008

It all fits!

I'll admit it.  I watched MSNBC tonight during the DNC's final few hours.  Not because it was my choice, mind you, but because it was the only station some of the gals down at Stern were willing to watch on their 36th street lobby's television.  Still though, it was little consolation to me, especially during the Chris Matthews Tirades (yes, that's a proper compound noun.  Only his rants have a special flavor, a blend of grown man locker room sweat and teenage girl at Justin Timberlake concert angst).  

What I couldn't help but notice, perhaps more than anything, was the constant attempt at placing everything about the evening, be it Gore's speech to Obama's speech, into a simple narrative.  According to this simple narrative Obama had to do three things tonight.  Appear tough enough to claim the title commander-in-chief.  Be specific about what "change" was.  And, of course, making judgement more of a factor than experience.  

How are these objectives chosen by the media?  How do I know that the average voter is concerned about these three things?  Well, the average voter is informed by media coverage.  And the media, in its attempt to sell, has reduced the race to a competition.  The competition, the fight, the battle, the war between Obama and McCain takes center stage.  Not the policy.   

In this sense, then, the media (please read MSNBC, since that is what I was watching) is guilty of creating gaps in the coverage of the race.  Even after Obama's speech, of which 1/3 was devoted to matters of policy, most of the talking points, 5 of the 8 I watched, were devoted to his comments about McCain.   

So, these objectives don't come from the Obama campaign.  If you visit Obama's website you can learn his opinion on policy.  His beliefs and his opinions are perhaps more available than any other candidates' in history.  No, these objectives come from a severe lack in media coverage that results from a simplified narrative designed to hype the big VS between the two candidates' names.  

Klein hits it out of the park when he writes that "the comment 'let's not make a big election out of small things' was not just a rejoinder to John McCain, but also to the press."  The need for a simplified, let's call it bumber sticker narrative, that hypes the conflict between the two candidates was the running theme of the evening.  

In the end, perhaps that is what the media really wants.  The narratives which they have put forth are not about the candidates.  They are not about the candidates positions, policies, or politics.  At the end of the day, at least tonight, the media's narrative was about itself.   

2 comments:

Cranky Doc said...

There's another dimension to this. The Media (we will unpack that soon) create a narrative: in this case, what x needs to do with his/her speech; the campaigns watch this coverage and can respond to it by having their candidate do x; the media then declare the candidate wise and victorious for having done whatever thing they decreed MUST BE DONE. And The Media get played. An elaborate game that utterly fails to include the, you know, public. Who also get played. I'm overstating this and oversimplifying, but the practice is common, and predictable. Look for it next week, when The Media decide what McCain MUST DO to counter Obama's much-heralded speech. And yes, precious little discussion about policy.

Matt Williams said...

Yeah. I noticed that too. I didn't think I had thought enough about that dimension to write about it though. It can get pretty convoluted.