My personal musings about anything that gets on my radar screen--heavily dominated by politics.


Covering the Coverage 

Colorado's Senate candidates held their first debate yesterday. Others have covered the debate very well here, here, and here, so I won't spend any space on that.

Instead, what interests me most is the coverage. Since very few Coloradans were actually at the event, or are likely to bother to watch the whole video of the debate, so whatever shows up on the evening news is likely to be all most of them know about the debate. And, I have to say, I was rather disappointed. Not surprised, but disappointed.

First of all, there absolutely WAS an "A-HA" moment in this debate: when Bob Schaffer read the text of a resolution introduced in the House citing Iraq's noncompliance with U.N. resolutions, pursuit of WMD, and state sponsorship of terrorism, the Udall crowd hissed . . . until Schaffer revealed that it was Udall himself that wrote that resolution. A beautiful rhetorical moment, if completely unimportant in the big picture.

NOBODY reported this moment, played video of this moment, talked much about this moment. Even 9News, who sponsored the debate, did not show the video.

What seemed to actually show up in the reportage was a fiesty Bob Schaffer making his points forcefully and articulately, paired with a mild Mark Udall constantly reminding us of his "moderate" views.

Saying a thing doesn't make it true; but saying a thing unchallenged by the media enough times DOES make it conventional wisdom, and that's almost as good as true.

One of these days, the media is going to be subjected to a debate with those of us who watch them. I hope I'm there to be a part of it.

Weblog Commenting by HaloScan.com

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?