Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : WHO IS RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT IN 2004 -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Raymond Duray who wrote (6048)	11/1/2003 9:50:46 PM
From: stockman_scott	Respond to of 10965

The Politics of Media Filtration ____________________________________ by Norman Solomon November 01, 2003 zmag.org Now, after all the national media have done for George W. Bush, the guy's complaining. "There's a sense that people in America aren't getting the truth," he says. What an ingrate! "I'm mindful of the filter through which some news travels," the president groused recently, "and sometimes you have to go over the heads of the filter and speak directly to the people." Some con artists are never satisfied. The big media's filtration process has worked to Bush's great advantage. During the 2000 campaign, his dismal record as governor -- complete with a truly awful environmental scorecard and a heinously cavalier approach to executions in Texas -- got woefully insufficient media attention. During his first months as president, with many Americans doubting the legitimacy of his electoral victory and sensing that he had risen way above his level of competence, the overall media coverage of the new chief executive was deferential. In mid-September 2001, with Bush suddenly ascending to the media stratosphere, Karl Rove and other political strategists in the White House began their relentless exploitation of Sept. 11. But they couldn't have pulled it off without the avid participation of mass media. Numerous mainstream news outlets swiftly hailed George W. Bush as FDR incarnate. They marveled at his consummate ability to use TelePrompTers and talk seriously in front of cameras. Exceeding low and narrow expectations, his stock spiked upward in the political marketplace. From war on Iraq to abrogation of key civil liberties to further skewing of the federal tax structure in favor of the wealthy, everything on the Bush team's wish list has been shamelessly pitched as part of the "war on terrorism." But even cowboys get the blues, especially when their imperial zeal turns out to be imprudent. Despite the world's most powerful military under their command, the global reach of the current empire-builders in Washington is exceeding its grasp. They're now facing some very tough quandaries. With the U.S. economy still slumping and the occupation of Iraq still in what Daddy Bush might call "deep doo-doo," we can expect the political exploitation of 9/11 to intensify between now and November 2004. Get ready for an election year full of efforts to wring every drop of media juice out of what happened on Sept. 11. In the new edition of her book "W: Revenge of the Bush Dynasty," journalist Elizabeth Mitchell notes that "the Republican National Convention will take place in New York City on the latest date in the party's 148-year history to inch it near to the anniversary of Sept. 11." Only a few days will separate the GOP convention in Manhattan and the 9/11 commemorations. The steady decline of Bush's approval ratings nationwide in recent months has surely accentuated the Rove administration's view of the 9/11 card as its ace in the hole. In the real world, his complaints notwithstanding, President Bush can "speak directly to the people" like no one else. The extent of his unfiltered media access -- including live coverage of rhetorical speeches and smarmy photo-ops -- is enormous. What's more, every day, media outlets are choking with Bush appointees, Republican leaders in Congress, supportive pundits and corporate-backed think tankers who tirelessly tout the president and his policies. And we ain't seen nothing yet. Much of Bush's anticipated $200 million campaign war chest next year will be devoted to purchasing entirely "unfiltered" access to the public in the form of commercials lauding the man's supposed greatness. Bush does have one thing right: By and large, the news media are functioning as a filtration system in this country. Of course, he wants it to filter out a lot more of the news and views he doesn't like. But Bush would be truly shocked if the nation's mass media acted less like a filtration system and more like a means for widespread democratic communication. In the United States and around the world, impoverished people who suffer because of the administration's policies are among the real victims of media filtration. But evidently their complaints aren't newsworthy. ___________________________________ Norman Solomon is co-author of "Target Iraq: What the News Media Didn't Tell You." For an excerpt and other information, go to: www.contextbooks.com/new.html#target

To: Raymond Duray who wrote (6048)	11/1/2003 9:50:58 PM
From: American Spirit	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 10965

New Hampshire depends on the media story. The media has touted Dean's larger leads in some polls but not reported Kerry's catching up in others. Neither have they repotred on Kerry's national lead in two polls. They report Kery has fallen. So it sets him up to be the comeback kid. That raises the bar for Dean. Now dean has to win by a large margin. No one is expecting Kerry to even be close, so if he loses by only 5% he actually wins. Same thing happened with Clinton in NH in 1992. No one remembers Tsongas won it, just the comeback kid 8% behind. Clinton's second place finish propelled him to victory. Ironically. In this case Kerry must make it very close to "win". 9% behind wouldn't do it, he needs at least 6% behind or less. And if he ties or wins, Dean is maybe fatally wounded. Then the news story becomes, whatever happened to Dean's momentum? It's gone. All of a sudden Kerry gets the front page of Newsweek and Time instead of Dean. Kery is the talk of the talkshows. They talk about his military experience and how 100% right he was about the war etc. That's worth 10% in the national polls which may be what it takes to win the nomination. Dont count out Kerry for one minute. He's smarter than Dean and more experienced. Notice how many embarrassing gaffes and flipflops dean has made. Kerry hasn't made a single one. right now there's this silly notion out there that Dean is "clear" and Kerry is not. Actually, not true at all. dean's the least clear of any of the major candidates.