Thursday, September 02, 2004

Best Convention Coverage Network?
You'd be surprised.

Politics in America has become a spectator sport but all we get are the box scores. Whether by lack of desire or lack of opportunity, few of us get to really watch "the game".

I remember having to watch the Democrat and Republican conventions as a kid and seeing the crowded convention floors...the red, white, and blue skimmer hats....Huntley and Brinkley and Walter Cronkite up in their respective booths while the floor reporters were jostled by the enthusiastic throng...long-winded announcement from each delegation before they announced their vote...in a word: hoopla. I say "having to watch" because this was before cable in the Land of Just Three Networks and each one devoted their entire prime time schedule to these historic events. Sure, as a nine or thirteen year old kid I was bored with most of it but I knew these were important events. The sheer onslaught of constant, inescapable coverage hammered that point home. And because it was so obviously important, I tried to pay attention and discern some sort of sense out of it.

Now as our country faces an entirely new kind of enemy with which we are ill-equipped (militarily, emotionally, and sociologically) to fight, as our labor markets faces net job losses not seen since the Depression Era, as the physical health of our citizens slips further and further (in relation to other industrialized nations) while health care costs continue to climb to astronomical heights, in other words, when we stand on the brink of an extremely important election, what kind of coverage do we get? An hour a night of "highlights" on the networks.

So what network has the most extensive coverage of these conventions? Al Jazeera. According to the article cited:
For 40 million viewers in the Arab world, Al-Jazeera...provides a window into the intricate world of American politics. This week, its 16 reporters and staff will air 13 hours of broadcasts from the convention -- more time than the combined coverage of America's major television networks, ABC, CBS and NBC.[bold & italics added]
Now, I'm not saying there mightn't be some sort of bias in their reporting but what does it say about us, as the leader of the democratized world, that we don't even pay attention to our own democratic process.

Heard this morning on Armstrong & Getty, a syndicated talk radio show out of Sacramento...Fox News is the big time ratings winner for the GOP convention, beating even all the broadcast networks. Quite an achievement, I must say. Interesting to note, however, that the numbers (as reported by A&G) for the other channels are essentially unchanged from what they got for the Democratic convention. The hosts (well, Joe in particular) cited the tendency of people to view the coverage that most falls in line with their political views. Fair enough. It would seem that loads of right-wingers paid no attention to the DemCon but tuned into their favorite propaganda machine to cover "their side". However, he went on to say that ABC, CBS, NBC and CNN appeals to the left, that would indicate those networks' bias. WRONG!
This is where critical thinking is required. While uptick in Fox's numbers would seem to support their right-leaning bias (because the GOP convention is an appealing event to the right), the absence of a downward shift in the other networks would indicated one of two things. Either the Left and Moderates are far, far more catholic in their information gathering that they watch both conventions equally on their preset station of choice...OR, those networks are truly lacking in any noticeably significant bias one way or the other and their viewers rely upon them to be so. The "fair and balanced" network I prefer to call Faux News, has to date aired three hours and seven minutes of the GOP convention after three days compared to just two hours and twenty-eight minutes of the same period of the DemoCon. The other networks are also devoting more time to the RNC than they did for the Dems but not quite to the same degree as Faux.
However, in the interest of fairness and intellectual honesty I will submit this for consideration: during the DemoCon, the nets got licked but good by PBS and C-SPAN, which had (and has this time, too) gavel-to-gavel coverage. Maybe the nets have learned a lesson and are trying to bump their convention coverage in general and it is simple scheduling that put the GOP in the cat bird seat. Yeah, maybe....and maybe monkeys will fly out of my ass and paint my house.

ref.s:
Al-Jazeera TV brings GOP to the Arab world / LIVE FROM N.Y.: Influential network covers convention

3 Comments:

At 9:18 PM, Blogger Man of Issachar said...

"as our labor markets faces net job losses not seen since the Depression Era"

you are kidding me right, what is the unemployment rate at.

what is a reasonably full employment number.

I suspect that you will find those two numbers too close for you taste

 
At 10:05 AM, Blogger Kokopelli said...

The US Department of Labor's Bureau of Labor Statistics shows a net loss of 1.2 million jobs from January, 2001, when W took office, through June of this year (2004, in case you don't have a calendar handy). While the employment picture seems to be on the upswing currently, given the present rate of increase this administration will still show a net loss of jobs, a feat not accomplished since Herbert Hoover, the man who ushered in the Depression. I stand by the statement.

 
At 10:15 AM, Blogger Kokopelli said...

I should also note that the point of this particular blog entry is not to debate the worthiness of W's presidency--although that would be fun in a shooting-fish-in-a-barrel sort of way--but to illuminate the fact that we, as citizens of the leading democracy of the world, do not engage ourselves in the process but merely sit back and accept whatever pablum is passed before our eyes. Furthermore, there may be a correlation between this lack of engagement and the absence of critical thinking that allows the myth of "liberal media bias" to persist.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home