Can one not also appreciate irony---the needle on the meter has not quite hit the level of Hypocrisy we are used to by now but its getting there---of most repubs pointing to the newspapers as gospel and instructive?? Gee , I can remember when not too long ago the press was considered, well, let's just say biased and elite....
<<<By Ellen Wulfhorst
NEW YORK, Sept 18 (Reuters) - In growing numbers, newspaper editorials across the country are clamoring for U.S.
President Bill Clinton to resign, yet in polls the American people are saying just the opposite.
The dissonance of those voices has industry experts and insiders contemplating just what leads a community to have one
opinion, and the mouthpiece of the community to have another.
''It's undeniable that there's a disconnect between the media and the public on this issue,'' Michael Zuzel, editor of the
Masthead, the journal of the National Conference of Editorial Writers, and an editorial writer at The Columbian in Vancouver,
Wash., said on Friday.
''There has been since it began,'' he said.
With many weighing in this past week, scores of U.S. newspapers have been calling for Clinton to leave office in the wake of
his affair with former White House intern Monica Lewinsky.
More than a few have pulled no punches.
''His repeated, reckless deceits have dishonored his presidency beyond repair,'' said the Philadelphia Inquirer.
Florida's Tampa Tribune called the president ''a laughingstock.''
By latest reported accounts, more than 100 of the nation's approximately 1,400 daily newspapers have published editorials
calling for Clinton to resign. Among the nation's largest newspapers, for instance, USA Today has called for the president's
resignation although The New York Times, The Los Angeles Times and The Washington Post have not.
Meanwhile, public opinion polls indicate the American people don't favor the president's resignation at all. A recent USA
Today/CNN/Gallup Poll, for example, showed more than two-thirds of those surveyed think Clinton should complete his term
in office.
''Poll after poll has told us the American people don't think this should be the defining factor in assessing the Clinton
presidency, and with increasing vehemence, newspapers are saying they do think at least it's important enough to pursue,''
Zuzel said.
Among editorial writers, he said, ''there's some thought that the American public just hasn't caught up yet, that as the details
sink in, as more people read the (Kenneth) Starr report and the videotape is shown, public opinion will change.''
Industry experts also note that a presidential resignation means quite different things to the media and to the general public. To
the media, such a story is the lifeblood of journalism, while to the public, it's a disturbance that's upsetting yet remote from
everyday life.
Reconciling the jarring difference between the people and the papers means defining the role of a newspaper and whether it
leads or follows, said Aly Colon, an expert in ethics and diversity at the Poynter Institute for Media Studies in St. Petersburg,
Florida.
As a leader, a newspaper tries to bring readers around to its point of view, while as a follower, it reflects the people's mood, he
said.
''Now I have this image of newspaper editors saying, 'Follow me,' and the readers looking in the other direction,'' he said.
In this case, said Robert Giles, head of the Media Studies Center and senior vice president of the Freedom Forum in New
York, the newspapers are clearly, and rightfully, the leaders.
''Newspapers don't write editorials with their finger in the air to see which way the wind is blowing,'' he said.
''Their editorial page staffs spend a lot of time reading and discussing the important issues of the day, and that gives a great
deal more weight to what they have to say as opposed to public opinion polling and what's said in a two-minute telephone
interview,'' he said.
Yet given the declining numbers of newspapers and declining circulation among those that have survived, Colon said, the
influence of editorials has waned.
Added to that, he said, are polls showing the American people do not have a particularly high opinion of the media and that
they tap into an array of outlets, not just newspapers, for information.
''The power of the editorial has been weakened by the fact that people are getting their information from many different
places,'' he said.
Nevertheless, people critical to the fate of the president still read newspapers closely, said Giles.
''People in public life continue to depend very heavily on newspapers,'' he said. ''Members of Congress pay a lot of attention
to what local newspapers are saying, as well as the major national dailies.'' >>>> |
