Driving around getting lunch today, I got to hear more NPR on my radio. They were talking yet again about the '08 Primaries (kind of like yours truly), and something struck me as I listened to them go on.
All they were either:
- Talking about who was winning each party's primaries and/or polls; or
- Talking about their talk about who was winning each party's primaries and/or polls
They were not talking about the issues or the candidates views on the issues. Being honest, I have to admit I heard some conversation about the issues, mostly about Giuliani having the balls to be pro-choice. Ever since the Iowa Caucuses (or slightly before), that type of report dropped off sharply in favor of the more sports-like who is currently winning the competition reports. I'm sure that there is still a bit of issue reporting going on, but the dominant weight is on the current standings. I guess that's just more exciting.
Still, I have to stop and wonder which type of story better serves the public good: reporting that informs voters about the candidates or their views/policies or reporting that informs the public which candidates the Press's pollsters believe is currently most favored.
No comments:
Post a Comment