It's not 1988, or even 2004 anymore. A single soundbite or scandal can't sink a campaign anymore. The proof may have been the last few "scandals" the beltway media has harped over. "Bittergate" produced a collective national shrug, Clinton's tax returns appeared and disappeared in the space of two days and McCain's "association" with a lobbyist has since disappeared.
In some ways, this is a good thing. Campaigns are insulated a little from the constant YouTube moments candidates produce in the space of eighteen hours of speaking, glad-handing and photo-ops. Mitt Romney's laughable "Who let the dogs out?" moment registered barely a blip in the media.
But then real problems with candidates might also get swept under the rug by a media looking for the next news cycle. In their hyperactive state, stories that might actually be important or worth further investigation disappear in the search for the next bit of video.
Frank Rich, in his NYT column focusing on the Media, hits upon several interesting points that should be highlighted. While most here on Kos would agree the MSM is in McCain's lap, busily orally satisfying him, how many of us realize how many assumptions, "facts" and "scandals" have failed to live up to the hype. Remember how Clinton's fundraising machine would swamp Obama? Add in "Bittergate"
and breathless intimations of imminent poll swings and superdelegate stampedes — the earth did not move. The polls hardly budged, and superdelegates continued to migrate mainly in Mr. Obama’s direction.
Thus did another overhyped 2008 story line go embarrassingly bust, like such predecessors as the death of the John McCain campaign and the organizational and financial invincibility of the Clinton political machine against a rookie senator from Illinois.
But even Mr. Rich, thinking himself somehow above the media that has been so fooled, reveals his own inability to disconnect from the assumptions and viewpoints assumed to be "facts" in the 2008 campaign:
Privileged though they are, Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Obama do want to shape policy to help the less well-heeled.
There we are, still assuming Barack Obama's upbringing was "privileged." We here on Kos tend to know better, being well-informed of the background of both Barack and Michelle. (And if you're not, here's the candidate's website bio.) That Mr. Rich, in a self-serving media critique, still in unable to divorce himself from the accepted storylines once again proves what many of us have assumed:
The Media, and even those in the Media who are the "critics," can't be trusted. They don't report "fact-facts" as Lewis Black called them. They are reporting what they've been fed, because they don't have the time nor inclination to actually do their jobs, collecting themselves and reporting the actual facts as "news."