The Media Vs. Kucinich et al., or, Is the Media Choosing Your President?

Great Debates
1

After a recent debate between the Democratic candidates had ABC’s Ted Koppel essentially endorsing Dean as the de facto candidate, ABC’s decided to remove their embedded reporters from Kucinich’s, Mosley-Braun’s, and Sharpton’s campaigns. This followed Kucinich’s response to the question, “When are you going to drop out?” (“I want the American people to see where media takes politics in this country…we start talking about endorsements, now we’re talking about polls and then talking about money. When you do that you don’t have to talk about what’s important to the American people.”) in the previous night’s debate. ABC claims it was a routine decision, but they also cancelled a scheduled interview with Kucinich.

It makes me wonder to what extent the media is deciding who is the “front-runner” and who is therefore worthy of coverage vs. who is worthy of being ignored. I hadn’t previously heard anything from the mainstream press about any of the candidates except for brief mentions of Gen. Clark’s record and Dr. Dean’s “Democratic wing of the Democratic Party” line. So is the media obligated to cover this race with some equality, or should it be left to the network heads which ideas the people hear about?

2

Don’t be silly. Everybody knows that the Supreme Court chooses the President.

d&r…

3

The media has a big rolein the public’schoosing of president.
Unfortunately.

4

The public learns about the candidates through the media. The media is not picking the President; Kucinich is not going to be President and never was, irrespective of ABC’s actions. Ditto Carol Mosley-Braun and Al Sharpton. It’s a process that feeds itself: some candidates do poorly, and the media doesn’t pay attention to them, which makes it hard to improve. However, Howard Dean was not a favorite a few months ago. The media didn’t pick him.

Then I’m sorry, but you’re not paying very much attention. Try the New York Times, I believe they have already run a profile story about every candidate.

My personal opinion is that there is no “the media.” People treat it as if it’s a homogenous body, which is far from the truth. There is no collective process by which the media gets together and decides “let’s not cover Dennis Kucinich because we don’t want him to be President.” If ABC wants to reallocate its resources, that’s too bad, but it’s not that hard a decision to understand. These 3 were fringe candidates from the start.

5

I would agree that there was (and is) no “get Kucinich” plot in the media. However, I would also suggest that Kucinch is correct in his criticism on this point. The media began treating the elections as if they were Oscar nominations a long time ago. While the NYT (and most major outlets) do take the time to cobble together a “profile” of each candidate, the day-in/day-out news stories focus on polls and war chests to the near exclusion of issues. An occasional sound bite on an issue will get through the poll and cash drivel, (such as the chorus of claims from the Democratic trailers, after this past weekend, that Dean is not sufficiently hawkish on the war), but far more emphasis is placed on “who is in the lead?” than on “what position do the candidates hold on this topic?”.

6

Here’s a Pro-Kucinich speech I wrote for Oral Comm class.

On November 4 th 2004 every one of us will be faced with a very important decision, determining who will be our next president. Often we don’t put enough thought and effort into a decision that will influence four years of our life. Instead many people go with the most popular person, or with the name they hear most often in the media. I’ve been following the candidates closely, and I would like to persuade each of you to consider voting for the presidential candidate I believe focuses best on the needs of the common person in America. His name is Dennis J. Kucinich, and he is currently one of the Ohio reps.

Last week I took an informal poll of this classroom. In it I asked you to choose among a list of issues that you found important to you. In my speech I’m going to focus on three of these topics, education, health care, and repealing NAFTA. The topic that elicited the most response was guaranteed quality education. According to kucinich.us only 2.9 percent of the federal governments budget is spent on education, even though it is the only proven method of reducing the poverty level. An article on Redding.com, which is an on line newspaper, says that a quality education is the way to close the gaps between rich and poor. According to the same article, focusing on a strong pre-school education also decreases the money needed on children later in school. On average each dollar spent on a program such as head start saves the tax payers six or seven dollars when the child is in elementary through high school.

Kucinich promises to focus attention on the education of America’s youth. Kucinich.us states that “Pre-K and after-school programs will get increased funding, and the soaring costs of college will be reversed.” He promises to give more money to schools so that they can decrease class size, increase teachers salaries, renovate decaying facilities, and provide hands on job training for the people not going to college. Kucinich also believes that education must emphasize creative and critical thinking, and not just test taking.

Another issue that you focused strongly on was national health care. The women’s economic agenda project states that America is the only industrial nation to not have universal health care. Instead we have insurance based care with high costs and very limited coverage. On their website, The US Census Bureau states that for the year 2002 over 15 percent of Americans had no health insurance whatsoever. If you stop and think for a moment, I 'm sure you can conjure an image of a senior who is important to you. He or she may be a parent, a grandparent, or a friend. Now imagine them having to chose between buying food or affording their medication. As kucinich.us notes “Today there are senior citizens throughout America who are forced to make cruel choices between paying the high cost of prescription drugs or buying food; between prescription drugs or clothing. Seniors are splitting their pills to make prescriptions last, splitting their budgets with $600 monthly prescription bills, splitting their physical and their economic health.” I personally believe that not a single one of us wants to think about our elderly relatives living under these conditions. … continued…

7

…Kucinich vows to change our current system with a plan that will be implemented over the next 10 years. The end result will be like Canada’s current system, where every resident has access to health care on a pre-paid basis. One of the reasons the cost of medication and seeing a doctor is so high is because private insurance companies want to make a large profit, just like any other corporation. Kucinich wants to take the privatization out of health care. This means that our health will no longer be tied to the insurance companies, but instead to what we and our doctors think is the best treatment plan for us. No more putting off necessary surgeries until we’ve saved enough money, or spending days on end with a sore throat, painful cough and muscle aches. Many people don’t realize this, but under our current health care system there’s already over a trillion dollars being spent each year in local, state and federal governments for health care. This means that you and I are already paying for health care, so why don’t we implement a plan that will actually give us the care we deserve. With Kucinich, we’ll be able to do just that.

The third issue I would also like to focus on is NAFTA, and why I believe America should withdraw from this and other like minded free trade agreements. Since its inception in 1994 NAFTA has been directly responsible for the loss of thousands of jobs by allowing manufacturers to ship their companies to Mexico. According to CBS.com in my hometown alone over 10, 500 people have lost jobs due to NAFTA. The unemployment rate in Martinsville Va is nearly 12 percent, and in some cities and towns of other states the unemployment is even higher. An article in the August 31st issue of the Peoria Journal Star explains the consequences, “Manufacturing jobs are vital to the U.S. economy because they give workers with basic skills and limited educations the opportunity to attain middle-class incomes. According to the U.S. Department of Labor, the average manufacturing worker earned approximately $45,000 in February 2003 compared to around $23,000 in the service sector and $19,000 in the retail sector. Manufacturing is also important because most displaced workers will likely move down, not up, the wage scale to much lower-paying service and retail-sector employment.” A good example is the upcoming closing of the Maytag plant in Galesburg Illinois which will put 1,600 out of work. Say one thousand 600

If elected, Kucinich promises that on his very first day as president, his first act of office will be to cancel NAFTA. Doing so will stop many manufactuers from laying off all their American workers and relocating their factories in Mexico because it will no longer be as profitable. On the National Public Radio show Kucinich talked with Bob Edwards. He explained that as president he would see to it that steel, automotive and aerospace industries are brought back to where they were as a mainstay of the American economy. This man firmly believes in an America where everyone who wants to work can easily find a job, and be able to support themselves and their family.

In conclusion, if you are interested in any of the above topics, then you really need to consider voting for Dennis Kucinich in both the primary and general elections. Between now and february I strongly urge you to take a look at his website at kucinich.us, and read what he has to say. Chances are good he’ll appeal to you as much as he does to me, and together we can vote for a brighter future for ourselves and our families.

Bibliography:
Dennis Kucinich 2004. (2003) Dennis Kucinich: The Progressive Vision. Retrieved September 20, 2003, from http://kucinich.us/issues/issue_10key.htm
Redding.com. (2003, May 18) Brain Child: How Science and Society Can Build Brighter Babies. Retrieved September 30, 2003, from http://www.redding.com/specials/brainchild/day2/2_4.shtml.
Women’s Economic Agenda Project. (2003, February 19) Just Health Care: 60 Million Uninsured. Retrieved September 30, 2003, from http://www.weap.org/60million.html
The United States Census. (2003, September 30). Numbers of Americans With and Without Health Insurance Rise, Census Bureau Reports. Retrieved October 1, 2003, from http://www.cenus.gov/Press_Release/www/2003/cb03-154.html
CBS.com (2003, August 1). Textile Bankruptcy Idles 6,450. Retrieved September 20, 2003, from http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/08/01/national/main566167.shtml
Edley B., and Johnson R. (2003, August 31). Make Tax Codes Help US Workers, End Tax Breaks for Companies Exporting Jobs; Encourage Job Creation Instead. Peoria Journal Star. Retrieved September 30, 2003, from http://www.pjstar.com/news/opedcolumns/b0imea/60imea3p059.html
United States Department of Labor. (2002, November 8). Alphabetical List of SOC Occupations. Retrieved September 30 2003 from http://www.bls.gov/oes/2001/oes_alph.htm
Profile: Ohio Congressman Dennis Kucinich. (2003, May 14). Morning Edition National Public Radio. Retreived September 29, 2003, from http://library.bigchalk.com/cgibin/WebObjects/WOPrimo.woa/1/wa/getDoc?listid=524790719&product=BCLib&refpage=NLBSResultPage&usageLogString=ResultType%3DNLBS%3B&query=Kucinich%20NAFTA&docid=73911573&reflabel=Results&idx=0&wosid=Ff3s832CkeRx2ugMv7M1ESCI0ss

8

Ain’t it the truth?! Like most consumers of “news,” I can tell you who’s leading in the polls in what states, who’s raising the most money, which candidates would give the Democratic ticket the best geographical balance, etc., etc., but if you ask me to differentiate among the candidates based on their stands on the issues, I’d have to go off and do some research. Other than knowing that Dean is the major anti-war candidate, I doubt that most viewers could provide any detailed information about the candidates’ positions.

I’d feel guilty about my lack of knowledge, except that in Virginia, the Democratic candidates don’t make much difference (though paradoxically, we often end up electing Democratic Governors - go figure). Add to that the fact that the Democrats could nominate a candidate who woofs, and eats his dinner from a bowl on the floor, and I’d still vote for him over Bush (apologies to Garrison Kiellor).

9

ABC wasn’t doing anything out of the ordinary in dropping coverage of Kuchinich and the rest. There simply is zero chance that they wold win. If anyone conspires to make this so, it’s the Democratic party itself, which is at least no so stupid as to allow people with 0 chance of winning the national election get any traction at all. Their only role in this .

That said, Kuchinich’s critique during the debate was right on. The way that the media covers politics is absolutely disgraceful. They repeat false spin releases verbatim without doing any research to correct the facts. They cover only the simplest stories to cover. They are chock full of know-nothing “pundits” who do nothing but talk shop nonstop and speculate endlessly and groundlessly about the secret inner motives of candidates. It’s ridiculous.

10

I think a better question is, “How come Kucinich, Moseley-Braun, and Sharpton still get to participate in debates and get treated seriously by the media?”

At least Kucinich is sincere. But the other two are just using the process for their own personal gain. Moseley-Braun in particular has no real constituency, and can’t be getting more than a couple of percentage points in polling. And yet, she manages to stick her nose into the very important process of choosing a Presidential candidate. She gets air time at debates, equal-time access to the media, etc. What’s up with that?

The Libertarians have *never managed to crack a Presidential debate or get much in the way of media attention at all. So why are these three getting all this exposure? Isn’t there some filtering capability in the nomination process that can separate the chaff?

11

Why yes there is. They are called “primary elections”. I’m surprised you’ve never heard of them. Lets let the Dems cast some votes before we go deciding which of their candidates are “chaff”.

12

Hey, every time there’s a Republican primary race, we’re treated to Alan Keyes, Lamar Alexander, et al… this is really no different.

13

http://comedycentral.com/tv_shows/thedailyshowwithjonstewart/videos_corr.jhtml?p=colbert

Check out the “interviews I could get” segments with Sharpton and Bob Graham.

Hilarious but topical. After seeing this interview, and even knowing that Sharpton DID such an interview, can you really see him ever making it anywhere?

“Now that you’ve dropped out of the campaign Senator [Bob Graham], who do you think you’ll still beat anyway? Carol Moseley Braun?”

14

According some polling data, Sharpton is doing better nationally than Edwards and Kerry.

15

What really irks me is when my newspaper (and many others) endorses a candidate for an elected position. A city-county newspaper should be unbiased. I know that this is difficult, depending on the community and editor,but endorsing candidates is a wrong headed thing to do.

Koppel was an asshole in that debate. Really. It was a bullshit thing to ask Kucinich “When are you going to drop out?”, before the first votes are even tallied. I like Dennis Kucinich, I really believe that he is a good guy, whose ultra-liberal heart wants to good for his country and world. My problem is that American liberalism is (was) a failure in this nation which proved little results.

Who says Kucinich cannot win? I can’t see any of those Democratic dorks winning either, so why dont the networks just quit covering them this year.

ET

16

Oh come on. He’s not even close to winning a single state, and the caucuses in Iowa are in a few weeks. His poll results everywhere are weak, he’s near the last of the pack. I know polls aren’t everything, and if you think ABC is wrong - and I’m not saying they’re right - fine. But Kucinich doesn’t have a chance.

Sigh. I see where you’re coming from. But unbiased in terms of what? Objectivity isn’t real, you can’t be objective. You can try. In any case, local newspapers are part of a community. They’re not sitting on a pedestal removed from it. People depend on them for news and analysis.

17

I think that the question is, what makes you a legitimate candidate? If I were to spend my life savings getting enough signatures to place myself on the Democratic primary ballot in all the states with primary elections, do I have the “right” to have an ABC reporter follow me around and report on me?

Sua

18

Damn it! I wanted to see the full quote that Kucinich said, but that website is blocked here at work.

I’ve always thought that the media needs to be held accountable for their actions. Look all the way back to Hearst’s statement, “You provide the pictures, and I’ll provide the war.” If you want a more recent example, the 2000 election debacle. The media on whole was much more liable than any other force in that election.

I, personally, have been bombarder with media snippets about the Democrat candidates. Granted, 90 percent of it is Dean, and the other 10 percent is divided between Clark and Kerry.

19

The OP is clearly right that the coverage (as happens) has a great effect on the success (or lack of success) of any individual candidate. The same could be said of movies, consumer products, what-have-you.

It’s also right that’s there’s no over-arching ‘media’ that gets together to decide who gets coverage or not. The wavelike behavior of that mass media combined with the ever present pressure to be the first with a story leads to safe decision making among the editorial class in the media. The story becomes some combination of which candidate has said the biggest thing lately and which candidate has been getting the best Q-Rating lately.

Combine that with the need to develop an interesting story and you get front runners being anointed months prior to any voting. And this DOES lead to the marginalization of certain candidates because there is a limited amount of space for any particular story on the front page.

Do I think it’s right? Not especially. But at the same time I don’t see a means to avoid it with a for-profit, competitive media space.

20

Where is all the coverage for Lyndon Larouche? He’s got minions outside the subway station every couple of weeks claiming he’s going to be the next Democratic candidate for President, and yet the mainstream media ignores him. Shocking.

Or, perhaps, not.