Monday, April 28, 2008

A Rant Against Political Coverage

In today's New York Times, Elizabeth Edwards rails against the maddening lack of substance in the mainstream media's coverage of the Presidential election.

Sadly, the article doesn't offer any solutions, but it's a rant I agreed with (and felt a little better after reading) , so I thought I would pass it on.

It seems to me that the coverage has gotten even worse in the last month or so. I've actually stopped watching the major cable networks discuss the election. Like Mrs. Edwards, I am offended that these political pundits spend 30 seconds - much less entire segments - discussing a candidate's bowling score or drinking abilities....

It's a 3 minute read and you can find it here.

2 comments:

Unknown said...

Is the American populace thirsty for solid political coverage from media outlets that refuse to provide it, or are the American people genuinely not interested and the media are only giving us what we want? It seems that the former would be straightened out before too long by regular old supply and demand, which makes me fear that it's actually the latter. If it is, I have to admit that I have no idea what can reasonably be done about it.

Jared said...

Yes, we've discussed this before and I'm afraid you're probably right.

What can be done... hmmmm.

I can't think of anything that wouldn't take a generation or two. We have to hope that our education system can produce a populace that is willing and able to produce and hold accountable leaders of sufficient quality and quantity I guess...

...isn't that a scary thought?

On the other hand, I'm not sure how effective TV news is at identify new markets and/or shifting to new demographic realities (like changing levels of education). Take cable political news shows, for instance. It would seem to me that they are only good at reacting to relative ratings levels (i.e. if they are beating the other programs they keep doing what they are doing, if they are behind they try to immitate (as Lou Dobss has done with Bill O'Reilly)).

But do they have the tools or marketing prowess to cater to a younger generation? I doubt it.

But it would seem that the internet and blogosphere would. And as underdeveloped and unreliable as the blogosphere currently is - it has and will continue to evolve and improve over time. Perhaps it will deliver us a better product...
of course, I am now assuming your original point that there must be a market for it...