Super Tuesday decisions
Posted on | February 5, 2008 | No Comments
It’s Super Tuesday, and there has been much teeth-gnashing in the Fuller household; my wife’s, not mine. She’s been torn between voting for Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. She likes the idea of an experienced woman with Senate years under her belt who has articulated concrete ideas on the campaign trail. She contrasts that with a Congressional rookie who talks movingly in platitudes, but the concept of “change” has an appeal. Here’s why this is relevant to this blog. The mainstream media not only has killed John Edwards’ chances (her first choice) because they love the Hillary-Obama horse race, it’s not covered the depth of the Illinois senator’s policies as much as it’s embraced his oratory and style. It covers Hillary’s policy wonkishness because that’s what she is and because her oratory is Politician 101. (This is my take). So as of late last night, my wife went online for answers. By the time, my head hit the pillow, she was finding some answers to her questions in new-media places (Google CEO Eric Schmidt’s interview with Obama on YouTube, for instance; it’s 64 minutes long! The program channel @Google Talks does many of the candidates, a fantastic service). Can’t find that on MSNBC or CBS. There’s also a lot of crap out there to sift through (childish, wrong or mean-spirited candidate attack-videos, for instance). So mainstream media has its biases. Big surprise. New media is a broad, if imperfect, resource. It takes time to sift through it all to come to conclusions. But then again, we should be spending more time doing that as part of our obligations in this democracy than we do watching “Survivor.” (Late today, she blogged about it).
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!
Related posts:
- The road ahead
- Sigh…
- The crisis is here
- Google’s Eric Schmidt yaks at Web2.0 Expo
- Obama pees; film at 11
Comments
No Responses to “Super Tuesday decisions”
Leave a Reply
February 5th, 2008 @ 5:56 pm
My hope and prayer is for brokered conventions for both parties. There HAS to be some better candidates!
February 6th, 2008 @ 10:05 am
For MSM, content and policy is irrelevant. Style and delivery is everything. And the American people rarely ask for more. You get the gunnamint you deserve.
February 11th, 2008 @ 10:23 am
I’ve always been deeply concerned about the role that media plays in elections. There’s so much non-information and misinformation surrounding issues and candidates stances on them.
Obama is, I’m sure, a plausable candidate but, his “Change” platform really doesn’t present much in the way of real change. It seems more like the concept of change is simply being exploited as a campaign slogan by his camp.
The only candidate that offered a platform that embraced real change was Ron Paul. But then, his cold logic and reason scared the crap out of mainstream media and, in response, got largely ignored for it.
As a young and successful professional, I have very little hope for the future because of what we’ve endured during the past several years and because of what we face in the coming years (I call your attention to your Bills or Blogs post for context). In order to endure what lays ahead for us, I really feel that real change needs to be made… pity that most Americans don’t share that perspective.