Mr. K, I totally agree with you that the fear is misplaced. (Thought I had made that clear.) It is just another example of what I was talking about in my previous post --an example of "paranoid style" thinking and/or rhetoric "oozing" into the general political discourse today.
2) Regarding "spin." Carville, you say? How about Rush Limbaugh, who has a much bigger permanent audience than Carville? As for the "media elite", I posted a piece some time back somewhere that argued that the "right wing" accounts for a large piece of it. (If you are interested, I'll try to hunt it down.)
I am not trying to defend "my side" (whatever that is) against "your side (whatever that is). My only point is that we all have a tendency to see the "mote" in the other guy's eye while ignoring the "beam" in our own.
3) I again totally agree with you that the line between journalism (i.e., reporting and analysis) and commentary is becoming blurred. The phenomenon you describe is what we call "advocacy journalism." (IMO, in this respect, "right-wing" publications, like The Washington Times, are the biggest sinners of all.)
But look on the bright side: the tradition of carefully balanced, carefully researched journalism is still holding its own.
BTW, I am in a fortunate position, myself. I pick the subjects of my own analyses -- they are not "assigned" to me. Nobody tells me who to interview, or how to approach the subject. (Maybe because nobody gives a damn about my subject!) And I am by no means unique.
4) Again, I agree with you that many important subjects go uncovered. This is a problem that journalists themselves routinely complain about (see James Fallows' recent book on the subject, for example). It certainly drives me nuts. Some major event occurs: the demonstrations in Tienanman Square; the Gulf War; the Clinton-Lewinsky scandal....And that is ALL you will see on television (the worst sinner in this respect)! The rest of the world has come to a stop, or even to an end! Nothing is happening, except that one thing! Everybody piles on, like ten million football players onto one little football! (I should stop now -- I'm getting hysterical.)
But this is not an example of the "PR" approach in journalism. If you want to be cynical about it, you can call it an example of "give them what sells newspapers" approach. If you do not want to be cynical, it is an example of the American tendency to go overboard, that is, to focus on one thing to the exclusion of everything else. :-)
jbe |
