March of the Pundits
Teaching Intro to American Government demands a bit of effort on my part to stay abreast of current events, particularly to help clarify the events that happen in our political stream. Since the big event in the media this week is the Democratic National Convention, I have made a concerted effort to follow it, much like I will for the RNC next week. I am dismayed that the only venues I could view the DNC proceedings without constant interruption were PBS and C-SPAN.
Every single cable news channel has a neverending chorus of mindless pundits speculating on the game theory behind the convention. Was the speech "genuine enough", is the venue "too symbolic"; hours and hours of mindless drivel and speculation. If this isn't bad enough, some of the best non-headliner speeches have not been broadcast to viewers to make sure that we can hear talking heads like David Gergen, Anderson Cooper, Joe Scarborough and Sean Hannity mindlessly prattle on with their interpretations of the events. We have missed speeches by generals and millworkers, victims of violent crime and pay discrimination. We have also missed plenty of speeches of lesser know party officials and state governors.
I say, let the people decide. Its a pretty damning case against the motives of the cable networks for the proceedings of the conventions to be so heavily filtered. Am I to let partisan commentators such as Bill Kristol and Charles Krauthammer play the revisionism card and make me rethink that Michelle Obama's speech Monday night wasn't spectacular? Am I to let Donna Brazille and Paul Begala butter me up to expect more out the Hillary Clinton speech than was probably delivered? It seems the cable news channels are more interested in stoking the fires of conflict to improve their own bottom line than being the unbiased conduit for information the country needs. And why should I let someone tell me how I am (or not going) to feel about a speech that hasn't even been delivered yet?
Do yourself a favor. If you are gonna watch the conventions, catch it on PBS or C-SPAN. Decide for yourself if the speaker makes a compelling case. And might I add that there are no commercials!
Every single cable news channel has a neverending chorus of mindless pundits speculating on the game theory behind the convention. Was the speech "genuine enough", is the venue "too symbolic"; hours and hours of mindless drivel and speculation. If this isn't bad enough, some of the best non-headliner speeches have not been broadcast to viewers to make sure that we can hear talking heads like David Gergen, Anderson Cooper, Joe Scarborough and Sean Hannity mindlessly prattle on with their interpretations of the events. We have missed speeches by generals and millworkers, victims of violent crime and pay discrimination. We have also missed plenty of speeches of lesser know party officials and state governors.
I say, let the people decide. Its a pretty damning case against the motives of the cable networks for the proceedings of the conventions to be so heavily filtered. Am I to let partisan commentators such as Bill Kristol and Charles Krauthammer play the revisionism card and make me rethink that Michelle Obama's speech Monday night wasn't spectacular? Am I to let Donna Brazille and Paul Begala butter me up to expect more out the Hillary Clinton speech than was probably delivered? It seems the cable news channels are more interested in stoking the fires of conflict to improve their own bottom line than being the unbiased conduit for information the country needs. And why should I let someone tell me how I am (or not going) to feel about a speech that hasn't even been delivered yet?
Do yourself a favor. If you are gonna watch the conventions, catch it on PBS or C-SPAN. Decide for yourself if the speaker makes a compelling case. And might I add that there are no commercials!