Opinion piece about Fox News employing the Republican candidates for president in 2012.
I sometimes go off the deep end with things, so I'd like to know--particularly from those with ocassional sympathies for non-Democrats--if this seems alarming. Is there something new here? Is Fox News really a new creation unlike NBC, CBS, ABC and NPR.
7 comments:
I think it may be new, but I don't know that I think it's alarming.
Think of it as massively increasing the chances of them putting something really stupid or offensive into the public record.
Well, that's true. I'm just saying that having a network so completely in the tank for one party, not even for one ideology, but specifically for one party. Not just giving them favorable coverage but campaign donations and jobs.
I'm pretty sure that William Randolph Hearst ran for president while owning 20 newspapers. He was enormously politically active and invested and used his newspapers actively to promote his political ideals.
Not new at all. Obama, I think, pointed out that the Hearst era was really the historic norm in US media and the concept of an impartial media is itself the new and aberrant model. We're just returning to the standard model, albeit in a new technological framework.
Krugman's other points are right on, though. I agree with Matt that it's not alarming, but as a non-conservative it's maddening. Conservatism has long represented moneyed interests and as such has long enjoyed stronger financial backing and institutional support. That's frustrating -- the fact that as a progressive you'll always face an opponent with a stacked deck.
As the article points out, Hearst is one person, not the entire field of candidates from a party. I'm not sure why having the most watched News outlet be an arm of a political party, not a political individual, is not alarming to you. Is this the advantage of devout cynicism?
Is this the advantage of devout cynicism?
At least in part, yes. I voted for Obama and while I was cynical about it, I was about as hopeful as I ever get in an election. What has happened? Well one thing that has happened is that this president has chosen for himself the power to sentence an American to death without any due process, review or oversight. That's as scary a power as anything Bush, Jr ever did. Just as scary. Maybe more so.
He's also not reformed health care, not substantially changed our position in the Middle East, hasn't held back the forces of insanity in the Republican party and he hasn't done much to reform banking.
He continued a policy started under Bush that worked to stem job loss a bit. That was nice. And he's black and *that* is nice.
So far, my cynicism rewards me at least with the inability to be outraged.
Post a Comment