One of the ongoing complaints of liberal bloggers is the "media narrative," by which they mean TV coverage of politics.
They’re right. The coverage is execrable. It is horrible. It is terrible. It is worthless. It is beyond worthless — it is malicious and evil and everyone involved should be fired. OK?
But that’s how they roll. That’s the only way they know how to roll. The present media environment was set in 1968, and has remained stuck in the Nixon Thesis ever since. It is part of the problem, by definition. Why belabor the point?
Fact is, this was true of the dominant media of the 1960s, as seen by conservatives. Movies and radio, by which we then meant music, were the primary enemies of the neo-conservatives. Their unfairness toward conservative positions, as defined by conservatives themselves, put a chip on their collective shoulders which remains firmly in place.
In response conservatives built their own, separate media universe. Republican music (country and gospel), Republican TV (Fox, CBN, etc.), Republican newspapers (Wall Street Journal, New York Post, etc.), Republican films and ethical universes, etc. etc. etc. Everything outside was automatically anathema, and the real story of this season is how those media are now turning on one another, leaving their readers and viewers confused, angry, ready to hear something else.
Today’s media narrative is the natural response to that worldview holding for 40 years, the entire career lifetime of virtually everyone who is anyone in the media universe. TV networks either endorse that view or attempt to coddle it. So-called liberals like Chris Matthews are anything-but — they are co-dependents.
We get it.
Glenn Greenwald at Salon offers yet-another example today. It’s a national tracking poll from Rasmussen Reports which, according to Greenwald, shows Edwards with the race’s momentum. Sounds great…but.
It really shows nothing of the sort. Greenwald takes Edwards’ low from
December 27, 16%, then marches it up to a high of 23% on January 6 and
says, ah ha, gotcha! In fact that last number is, as they call it, an
"outlier." The last two surveys have shown Edwards at 20%, as did the
survey of January 5. Since December 27 he has gained 4 points.
Sounds good. Sounds newsworthy. But during the same time Obama has
gained 5 points, nationally, while the real news is that Hillary
Clinton is down 7, from 39 to 32. (The last drop of 4 is outside the graphic to the right, which comes from Greenwald’s column.) You could, if you like, claim she is
down even more, since her top number was 43.
Edwards himself said on TV today that the actual race is "tight as a
tick," that Obama gained only one more delegate than he did in Iowa,
and he gained one more than Clinton. He’s right. But that’s not where
the momentum lies — it lies with Obama, both in New Hampshire and
nationally.
This is now a three-person race and Edwards is going to have to take on
Obama while watching Clinton disappear in order to win. That’s a tough
ask. His strategy in last weekend’s debate was to stand alongside
Obama, and damn Clinton as "old politics." The hope is he can get close
to the top two today, then go after Obama down the road, with some institutional support from the failed Clinton campaign.
The TV people, meanwhile, want to end the story tonight, and a big Obama win (which is now expected) might do it for them.
But here’s the thing. That narrative isn’t the only one. That narrative
isn’t reality. It’s just a narrative, told by an old medium set in a
past generation’s patterns.
The new narrative is being defined online, by people like Greenwald,
and Digby, and Kos. They don’t yet realize how much power they have,
and they are (on the whole) beginning to act like either advocates or
pundits, no better (and no different) than the people on TV.
That would be wrong. Don’t give us a pale imitation of what’s on the TV. Look at the issues. Remind us, again and again, of what’s important. Focus on what’s being ignored. Build your own narrative.
And give us tons-and-tons of it, so no matter how we feel we can be
reinforced, or challenged, every hour of every day, as much as we want.
That’s the future. All this carping about the "media narrative" is the
past. It sounds like some right-wing yahoo from the 1960s complaining
about that "rock-and-or-roll."
You’ve got the power. Act like it.
