3 Political Stories (Intentionally) Misrepresented by the Right Wing Media
3 Political Stories (Intentionally) Misrepresented by the Right Wing Media
When taking issue with right-wing news agencies a lot of discretion has to come into play. This is largely because most conservative news media is wrapped in opinion. In fact, studies show that 68% of news reporting for conservative outlets is opinion as opposed to far fewer numbers ranging from 20%-4% for their opponents. However, what makes it hard to differentiate is that conservative opinion is held separate from the actual "news" while left-wing media outlets are far more apt to include an angle or agenda in actual news reporting. That being said, this article deals with the "news" side of conservative reporting.
3. Any Time Obama is not in Office
Have you ever noticed that every time Barack Obama is not in the Oval office when something important is going on there's some kind of headline on conservative media outlets reading "Obama has better things to do than foreign policy" or "President on vacation during crisis". Seriously, just how much can you spam this headline to death?
Some will immediately point out that President Obama has taken more vacations than any other president, and that he's spending a lot of his presidency in "campaign" mode. Also that Bush seemed to get criticism for not being "on call" 24/7. Like when he was still maintaining a schedule during the first 24 hours after Hurricane Katrina an didn't cancel his activities until reports of things getting out of hand emerged.
I duly understand and take those points, and then immediately point out that just because it may seem tit-for-tat doesn't make it legitimate news. The problem is that conservative media outlets have led with so many stories of Obama campaigning or vacationing when there's work that can be done, that when something really legitimate crops up, no one cares. Like this past week when the United Nations was meeting to discuss the outcry in the Middle East and riots against the United States, In between campaign stops Obama scheduled a measly 24 hours in New York at the Assembly when most leaders were going to be there a week. Then he spent the morning on the View once in New York, not even going to the Assembly. It was bad enough even CBS had to remark on it. But just like the little boy that cried wolf, they've been shouting that tune for so long people don't really listen.
Here's a news flash, "president's will take vacations too," and it doesn't mean every time he does that he's being irrisponsible and neglecting America's citizens. There is simply no time anywhere there cannot be found a legitimate crisis. A president can't be on duty every day 24/7. If you haven't heard yet, that's a tough job. Just look at before and after photos of every president that has gone into office and you'll see what I mean. The job takes a toll on you. You have to relax or you'll go crazy or at least explode or something. In that regard, aren't we glad he takes time off?
Okay, yes, it has been pointed out that the BP Oil Spill went by for some time and the government wasn't doing much about it. It was all, "What's taking so long BP?" And whatnot. But the coverage was pretty rediculous as we were treated to daily reports of how many days its been, how extensive the damage was and how the Obama Administration was doing nothing about it.
No one had dealt with a spill quite like that. It was the perfect disaster as all the fail-safes coveniently failed and the problem was deep underwater where it was difficult to find a solution. Not only that but it was a continuous spill, not like some tanker, this thing was a faucet that we couldn't turn off, just leaking tons of oil into the Gulf of Mexico.
Suffice to say, the cause wasn't Obama deciding to force oil companies into harsh times to make cutbacks as it was insinuated on some occasions, the oil companies have made higher profits in recent years than they have in thast few decades. The problem was BP cutting corners and taking their sweet old time replacing faulty equipment. Anyone who has worked for a large organization knows what that's like. All the company sees in the bottom line, rather than, you know, safety concerns or productivity due to bad equipment.
What Obama did, if anything, was put pressure on BP to clean it up and offer some assistance. Some saw that as negligent, but seriously, if the United States had decided to clean it up themselves, guess who they'd be contracting...probably BP or any of the large oil comanies. Seriously, the guys we would have used to help were at fault so there's no point in doing it ourselves, unless we really felt like paying for it out of taxpayer dollars. I guess we can fault Obama for saving us money.
3. The War in Afghanistan
It's amazing to me how during the Bush Administration conservative media outlets were very cautious about what they included in their reports. There were constant defenses of the Bush Administration for the job being done in Afghanistan and we got a pretty good picture from conservative media even during the bad times when they almost lost control of the country to the warlords and the United States had lost large swafts of territorial control.
But even in the weeks leading up to Obama taking office the mood was changing already. Most stories had a tone of "how essential winning in Afghanistan was", but as Obama took office the tone changed instantly to "why are we still there when it costs so much?" Which is the only story the left-wing media ran about Afghanistan since 2003. Other than every time the US accidentally caused civilian casualties, but I digress.
Since Obama took office the conservative outlets have been right on top of every bad thing happening in the country. So much so that is sounds like the United States is about to lose control and our "exit" is looking like more of a retreat. No one will have to convince the world the US occupation of Afghanistan was the same as the Soviet Unions in the 80's, we're making the case for them ourselves.
Despite this the US still has control of the country, so much so that their opponents can't operate in the open anyore. That's why they're doing sneak attacks, terrorist attacks, and infiltrating the Afghani Security Forces, because if they are out in the open, they're doomed. That doesn't sound like progress to anyone?
Obama played the "Surge" stretegy in Afghanistan just like Bush played it in Iraq and the only story heard from right-wing media was how a) he's totally copying Bush after slamming him during his campaign, and b) how it wouldn't work as well because it's like, Afghanistan and all. Well, for those paying attention, the surge worked well. We gained back territory lost, we settled uprisings and moved the entire enemy operation into Pakistan, out of reach. What we are dealing with is the attitude the people of Afghanistan who were prdisposed to not like the US from the beginning, much less now that anti-American sentiment has resurfaced as a driving force politically in the Arab Spring.
If we are to take the fact that Afghanistan still doesn't let women get away with not covering their faces as we have failed, then hold on for a long fight, because it will take decades of huge wins to change 1500 year old views held by over a billion people in the same area of the world.
When taking issue with right-wing news agencies a lot of discretion has to come into play. This is largely because most conservative news media is wrapped in opinion. In fact, studies show that 68% of news reporting for conservative outlets is opinion as opposed to far fewer numbers ranging from 20%-4% for their opponents. However, what makes it hard to differentiate is that conservative opinion is held separate from the actual "news" while left-wing media outlets are far more apt to include an angle or agenda in actual news reporting. That being said, this article deals with the "news" side of conservative reporting.
3. Any Time Obama is not in Office
Have you ever noticed that every time Barack Obama is not in the Oval office when something important is going on there's some kind of headline on conservative media outlets reading "Obama has better things to do than foreign policy" or "President on vacation during crisis". Seriously, just how much can you spam this headline to death?
Some will immediately point out that President Obama has taken more vacations than any other president, and that he's spending a lot of his presidency in "campaign" mode. Also that Bush seemed to get criticism for not being "on call" 24/7. Like when he was still maintaining a schedule during the first 24 hours after Hurricane Katrina an didn't cancel his activities until reports of things getting out of hand emerged.
I duly understand and take those points, and then immediately point out that just because it may seem tit-for-tat doesn't make it legitimate news. The problem is that conservative media outlets have led with so many stories of Obama campaigning or vacationing when there's work that can be done, that when something really legitimate crops up, no one cares. Like this past week when the United Nations was meeting to discuss the outcry in the Middle East and riots against the United States, In between campaign stops Obama scheduled a measly 24 hours in New York at the Assembly when most leaders were going to be there a week. Then he spent the morning on the View once in New York, not even going to the Assembly. It was bad enough even CBS had to remark on it. But just like the little boy that cried wolf, they've been shouting that tune for so long people don't really listen.
Should Obama be a allowed to take a break? The Honorable Juan Williams presiding.
Here's a news flash, "president's will take vacations too," and it doesn't mean every time he does that he's being irrisponsible and neglecting America's citizens. There is simply no time anywhere there cannot be found a legitimate crisis. A president can't be on duty every day 24/7. If you haven't heard yet, that's a tough job. Just look at before and after photos of every president that has gone into office and you'll see what I mean. The job takes a toll on you. You have to relax or you'll go crazy or at least explode or something. In that regard, aren't we glad he takes time off?
George W. Bush 2000 (left) and 2008 (right).
Point made.
2. The BP Oil SpillOkay, yes, it has been pointed out that the BP Oil Spill went by for some time and the government wasn't doing much about it. It was all, "What's taking so long BP?" And whatnot. But the coverage was pretty rediculous as we were treated to daily reports of how many days its been, how extensive the damage was and how the Obama Administration was doing nothing about it.
Roughly translated he's saying "OBAAMAAAA!"
Now let's be honest, this was a BIG spill. The likes of which have not been encountered before. In that regard, maybe this is Obama's Hurricane Katrina, because there was a lot of disaster that hadn't ever happened on that magnitude and a whole lot of it was OUT OF HIS CONTROL! Yet he still got blamed for it. It was that rare moment Bush and Obama could have been bunk buddies or something. No one had dealt with a spill quite like that. It was the perfect disaster as all the fail-safes coveniently failed and the problem was deep underwater where it was difficult to find a solution. Not only that but it was a continuous spill, not like some tanker, this thing was a faucet that we couldn't turn off, just leaking tons of oil into the Gulf of Mexico.
Suffice to say, the cause wasn't Obama deciding to force oil companies into harsh times to make cutbacks as it was insinuated on some occasions, the oil companies have made higher profits in recent years than they have in thast few decades. The problem was BP cutting corners and taking their sweet old time replacing faulty equipment. Anyone who has worked for a large organization knows what that's like. All the company sees in the bottom line, rather than, you know, safety concerns or productivity due to bad equipment.
What Obama did, if anything, was put pressure on BP to clean it up and offer some assistance. Some saw that as negligent, but seriously, if the United States had decided to clean it up themselves, guess who they'd be contracting...probably BP or any of the large oil comanies. Seriously, the guys we would have used to help were at fault so there's no point in doing it ourselves, unless we really felt like paying for it out of taxpayer dollars. I guess we can fault Obama for saving us money.
3. The War in Afghanistan
It's amazing to me how during the Bush Administration conservative media outlets were very cautious about what they included in their reports. There were constant defenses of the Bush Administration for the job being done in Afghanistan and we got a pretty good picture from conservative media even during the bad times when they almost lost control of the country to the warlords and the United States had lost large swafts of territorial control.
But even in the weeks leading up to Obama taking office the mood was changing already. Most stories had a tone of "how essential winning in Afghanistan was", but as Obama took office the tone changed instantly to "why are we still there when it costs so much?" Which is the only story the left-wing media ran about Afghanistan since 2003. Other than every time the US accidentally caused civilian casualties, but I digress.
Since Obama took office the conservative outlets have been right on top of every bad thing happening in the country. So much so that is sounds like the United States is about to lose control and our "exit" is looking like more of a retreat. No one will have to convince the world the US occupation of Afghanistan was the same as the Soviet Unions in the 80's, we're making the case for them ourselves.
Despite this the US still has control of the country, so much so that their opponents can't operate in the open anyore. That's why they're doing sneak attacks, terrorist attacks, and infiltrating the Afghani Security Forces, because if they are out in the open, they're doomed. That doesn't sound like progress to anyone?
This has nothing to do with the topic, but it's totally sick!
Obama played the "Surge" stretegy in Afghanistan just like Bush played it in Iraq and the only story heard from right-wing media was how a) he's totally copying Bush after slamming him during his campaign, and b) how it wouldn't work as well because it's like, Afghanistan and all. Well, for those paying attention, the surge worked well. We gained back territory lost, we settled uprisings and moved the entire enemy operation into Pakistan, out of reach. What we are dealing with is the attitude the people of Afghanistan who were prdisposed to not like the US from the beginning, much less now that anti-American sentiment has resurfaced as a driving force politically in the Arab Spring.
If we are to take the fact that Afghanistan still doesn't let women get away with not covering their faces as we have failed, then hold on for a long fight, because it will take decades of huge wins to change 1500 year old views held by over a billion people in the same area of the world.
Comments
Post a Comment