We're losing a game that we're not even playing. Modern journalism hinges on the sensational and we're focusing on the important. Maureen Dowd got her Pulitzer by reporting on the most sensationalistic political story ever: Monicagate. Day in and day out, she and her contemporaries focus on the types of sensational stories that matter for modern journalists and politicians rather than important stories or investigating corruption in all levels of government. For most journalists, all that is required to pen a good story is an accusation; If you focus on actually researching a story and performing in-depth analysis (like following the money, walking back the cat, etc) you get left behind other journos who are willing to "shoot from the hip".
Take TV news which has 24 hours in a day to fill with news and analysis. Unfortunately for Americans, analysis is shorthand for punditry, which itself is shorthand for "spouting off about my opinions more loudly than anybody else". Debate is neither informative nor substantive. If someone on the left is engaged with someone on the right, the debate is not moderated with both sides allotted the same amount of time and disallowed from talking over each other. It is instead, either a shoutfest or, at worst, a soundbite-fest. If a politician (and I notice this happening more with Democrats) is being interviewed one-on-one by a pundit/journalist, the interview is a series of "tough" "engaging" questions that seek one thing: the gotcha. For a recent example highlighting this technique, see Norah O'Donnell's interview of Howard Dean linked to from Al Rodger's Sunday Talk diary. This wasn't a hard-hitting interview. It was journalism being played as a game where the winner is the person who accuses their opponent of being untruthful or inconsistant. Does every journo have wet dreams of the big moment where they say "HAH! Gotcha!" and it actually means something? I long for the days of substantive reporting by journalists who are not obsessed with the short-term gratification of catching a politician in a so-called gaffe.
However, columnists have their own tools at their disposal. Think of the emotional phrases contained in the Newsweek article about Markos: activist movement they were eager to exploit, the rock-thrower is growing up, going down to a sound defeat, the Democrats' failed Iraq strategy, infected with the paranoia of revolutionaries, etc. This isn't a story about a movement. This is a story seeking to define and blunt a movement. Journalism has always had tinges of the opinion of the writer, and written stories give columnists with the ability to turn a phrase an outlet to inject their opinions and desires much more subtly and effectively than TV punditry.
We would be much better off without Gossip Politics. Think of the stories that broke or were sustained for months because of their sensational value. Gossip in political reporting has tainted such good people as Bill Clinton (most obviously), John McCain (before he sold out), John Kerry (and his wife), and Howard Dean. The "craft" of journalism has become sullied and I cannot blame it on the media consolidation of the last 5 years. I blame it on the ubiquity of "news". When news was relegated to an hour after primetime on each of the three networks there was no time for stories like the "Dean Scream" and no time for talking heads to bloviate about their latest talking points. Stories meant much more and had more punch. And if someone wanted more information than what was provided in the story, they read the papers or did some research of their own. Back then, there were facts. Reporters reported those facts that they found interesting and even went to pursue new facts that were unknown. Yes, journalism is a dying science that is being replaced by PR spinners posing as true journalists. This site and others like it are seeking to put the pursuit of facts back into politics. However, maybe there's something else we could do.
If we truly want to Destroy the Fence, shouldn't we provide all the services that the media provides? Specifically, isn't it about time for us to focus on gossipy, sensationalistic stories? I think it's about damn time. Let's start now:
ITEM: Vice President Dick Cheney is said to have scheduled a sneerectomy for an unspecified date. It is believed that Vice President Cheney's doctors have advised him to wait until his heart starts beating again and he loses his hunger for braiiiinnns.
ITEM: Donald Rumsfeld is George W Bush's father. Sources tell me that Rummy and Babs got together while George H W Bush was away on business. The same source says that Donald and Barbara are also long lost siblings. This explains W's intelligence shortcomings as well as the hump on his back that has been mistaken for a radio transciever.
If you have any other interesting tidbits you have learned from your "sources" feel free to post them below.
