In a Roberts thread someone wrote something to the effect that by not opposing too hard and playing ball with Roberts it would get the media on our side. That by not standing up as the adamant and reasoned opposition it would provide us with an ally in the media and ammunition for when Bush nominates a "radical right-winger" for O'Connor's slot. My response got so long and heavy-handed, I figured it was more appropriate as a diary.
Running to the middle is a losing strategy for winning media coverage just like it is a losing strategy for winning elections.
I understand the desire of people who want to make friends with the media and the voters in the middle. It comes from a good place. We like friends. We make them by being nice to people. Friends stick together and help each other out. So, if we are nice the media will see we are nice and want to hang out with us and will be on our side the next time there is a fight.
Wrong.
Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong.
More below the fold.
It is useless to attempt to curry favor with the media. The carrot and stick that drive the media are money and access. We have neither to offer.
The media is a hungry wild animal. Being nice only makes you look tasty. The way to get the media on your side is to feed it. And remember, it's still a wild animal.
What does the media eat? Controversy. It thrives on it. It will manufacture it when it's not there. By lessening controversy over Roberts all it does is make it less of a story.
The way to get media coverage is to provide this controversy. The Republicans know this and repeatedly use this strategy. They do it even though they also have the carrot of money and the stick of access because the media needs a feeding frenzy to generate ratings to make money. The media makes money, the boss is happy.
The Roberts nomination was one of the most politically astute moves ever made by BushCo. It behooves us to think the next nomination will be as well. Yes, the next nominee may be a radical right-winger, but if we say "Hey, that's not fair. We were nice on the Roberts. Now you give us Nominee Crazy Person?" How do you think BushCo will respond? It sure won't be "Oh yeah, sorry."
It will be some variation of "There you go again." It will be a denial that Nominee Crazy Person is a radical winger. BushCo will say, "This isn't Nominee Crazy Person, this is Upstanding Citizen Smartest Family Judge Who Ever Lived. Why are you always running around with your hair on fire?"
What are we going to say then? "But, but, but... We were nice on Roberts."
Then they'll say, "Nice on Roberts? Of course you were. Roberts is a great and fair justice. You said so yourselves. Are you saying you were lying about how you felt? Why can't you be honest?"
Do you see a pattern here?
When BushCo nominates the next justice, any opposition we put up will be met with an attempt to be louder or appear more reasonable by them. The media will not tell BushCo and the Republicans to be nice to us or take our side. The media will eat it up. And the louder we protest the more the Republicans will protest back.
Until we learn to be louder and hit harder we will lose. We will lose the media and we will lose elections. It is up to us to fight back. The media will not fight for us. If we do not comply the media will engineer the fight and the Republicans will comply. They'll fight like they are the loyal opposition even though they are in power (just like religious fundamentalists act like they are persecuted even when they aren't). No matter how much we whine about it being unfair and trying to make everyone play nice. Until we learn this we will be the kids that always got hit in the head playing dodge ball. Remember that? I do. I was one of them. You can cry all you want and convince people that the bully was playing unfair but it doesn't change the fact that you are out of the game.
The way to win is to learn to throw the ball hard and hit the other player before he hits you. Aim for the head.