I’ve made no secret of the fact that I’m sick and tired of mainstream media. Gone are the days when reporters reported the news. In this day and age of advertising bucks meaning more than content, reporters have stepped outside of their historical role of informing the public about events happening in their community, or state or nation or whatever. Editorials are no longer listed as such, either in print or on-air. It’s bad enough most years, but in a presidential election year it is even worse.
What brought on this morning’s rant is simple: I turned on the TV to get the weather just in time to catch one of those reports that, if I hadn’t instantly recognized the reporter, would have had me convinced that Mitt Romney was the worst human in the world to be elected to any office, much less the presidency. But, because I recognized the reporter — and knew she made it her goal to convince everyone possible that every conservative, and even most libertarians, are out to kick this country back to the Dark Ages.
For close to two minutes, this reporter — on a local broadcast — did her best to castrate Governor Romney for things he said during the last debate. Of course, she did manage to take comments out of context, she paraphrased and she gave her own interpretation of what he meant when he said something. Funny thing, she never once mentioned what President Obama, her candidate of choice, had to say, nor did she say why it would behoove us to vote for the incumbent — other than the fact the challenger is soooooooooo out of touch and bad for everyone, especially women.
Now, I can hear some of you asking why I’m not identifying the reporter or the station. Basically, because it isn’t important. For one, I don’t want to give her any more publicity than she gets in her roles as reporter and commentator. For another, she is merely an example of why I’m tired of what’s happened in journalism over the last 50 or so years.
An editorial is something very different from reporting. An editorial lets the reporter or on-air personality give their personal opinion about something. A reporter is supposed to report, to give the reader or the viewer/listener the facts only. It’s rare enough that we get that on any given story these days, especially if the source is the main stream media. It’s worse during election time, as today’s piece showed.
This piece was nothing more but a round-about way for the reporter to bleat on about her favorite topic: the Republicans’ war on women. WTF?!? According to her, if Governor Romney is elected and if he defunds Planned Parenthood, lower income women will have to choose between getting their mammograms and pap smears or putting food on the table. Why? Because they won’t be able to afford both.
Okay, I have a several problems with this sort of statement. First, is one of simple understanding of how the U. S. government works. The president doesn’t pass the budget. He doesn’t decide who gets funded and what doesn’t. He can lobby for his wants. He can threaten to veto a budget when it comes to him. He can even carry out the veto, leaving it up to Congress to override it.
My second problem is that the argument forgets one little thing, something this reporter’s choice for president managed to get passed: Obamacare. Even if Planned Parenthood is defunded and somehow goes the way of the dodo, under Obamacare, everyone has to have medical coverage of some sort. That means the tests Planned Parenthood does now would be covered. But that’s not something they want us to remember.
Or, if they admit that’s true, they then point to the fact that the Republicans want to repeal Obamacare. So, see, there is a problem. Well, not yet. Because it has to happen. If elected, Governor Romney can’t just site back at his desk in the Oval Office, snap his fingers and Obamacare disappears.
My third problem is that she never said, “this is my opinion”. Nor did the station put up a graphic identifying her and noting that this was an op-ed piece. If you missed the lead-in, you’d have no idea it was an editorial. And that, you see, is the problem. It’s another instance of a reporter, and a station, trying to make news instead of reporting it.
Maybe I’m stuck in the Dark Ages. But I remember when reporters were supposed to only worry with the following: who, what, when, where, why and how. Or, to quote Joe Friday from Dragnet, “Just the facts, ma’am.”
So yes, I’ll be glad when the election is over. Except it will only be a lull before the next phase starts. I have visions of the accusations of voter fraud, hanging chads and who knows what if the president loses the election. We’re already seeing indications of how the MSM will react simply by how it is doing its best to “debunk” the latest Gallop Poll that shows Governor Romney ahead by six points. If you don’t believe me, look at the next major newscast and see how they bury that story amid stories about how the sales of Halloween masks have predicted something like the last four presidents or how the winner of the first lady cookie bake-off have predicted the winners. Yep, you read that right. ABC ran a story this morning including those examples as well as others. All after noting that the Gallop Poll results were “an outlier” and not in line with so many other polls. Funny thing, the only polls they included in this were the ones that put the president in the lead.
Sigh.
Is it any wonder so many people are looking for alternative sources for their information than the MSM? By the time they figure out that the majority of Americans are tired of them telling us how we ought to think, newspapers will have gone the way of the dinosaur. Advertising dollars will be going to other stations and shows. And those sitting in the board rooms will be looking at each other wondering what happened.
