Monday, September 29, 2008
Sarah Palin on Rape Kits: Rape Victims Pay for Their Own
I just found this video on Feministing.com, my personal favorite blog. I wouldn't recommend listening to the end of it, as it gets a bit offensive in my opinion, but the beginning does a good job at pointing out the ridiculousness of Sarah Palin's policy of asking rape victims to pay for their own rape kits. I love progressive videos directed at 20-somethings and think it is one of the most important "new media" developments to have been popularized. Videos, especially sarcastic/humorous ones, are a great way for the media to reach a sector of the population that is famously disinterested in traditional media outlets, such as the magazine and newspaper. There are a ton of tech-savvy feminists making interesting and truthful videos and feminist groups' interaction and interest in the media is large. After working for a feminist publication this summer (Ms. Magazine) I have been exposed to a whole world of progressive/woman-created media. Speaking of: the Women, Action and the Media conference is accepting proposals for sessions for their March gathering.
Debate Polls: Journalism
An article by Megan Tady, a writer for Free Press, measures voter reactions to the quality of journalism present in the foreign policy debate last Friday. Speaking from the standpoint of a person who is damn sick of polling, I found this spin on the all-too-common "what do you think of Obama?" poll to be quite interesting.
The article is centered around RatetheDebates.org results, a website that allowed viewers/listeners of the debate to weigh in on what they thought of Lehrer's performance, his questions and after-debate media discussion. The article states that:
"Obama supporters in the panel tended to criticize the absence of questions on Africa (80% vs. 58% of McCain's) and China (74% vs.64%); and on the foreign policy issues of global warming (89% vs. 42%); human rights abuses (85% vs. 57%); AIDS and other diseases (86% vs. 55%); and globalized trade (76% vs. 56%)"
I couldn't agree more with this criticism of Lehrer's questioning. It again begs the question that we have been asking ourselves in class: if third party candidates were allowed to participate in debates, would these questions been asked?
The article also confirms some perceptions we have been discussing, including one held by conservatives of the "liberal media" and liberals of the "conservative media."
"McCain and Obama supporters alike tended to be more critical of the quality of election coverage by traditional broadcast news sources. Nearly 7 out of 10 McCain supporters (69%) rated election coverage by national network news as "poor" (versus 52% of Obama supporters). Nearly 7 out of 10 Obama supporters (68%) counted as "poor" local television news (versus 58% of McCain supporters). "
Though not excessively substantive, I found this article to be interesting for its insistance on good journalism, especially in the debates. This is an issue that needs to be addressed incessantly as the debate season has been opened. Here's to looking forward to the Palin-Biden debate this Thursday.
The article is centered around RatetheDebates.org results, a website that allowed viewers/listeners of the debate to weigh in on what they thought of Lehrer's performance, his questions and after-debate media discussion. The article states that:
"Obama supporters in the panel tended to criticize the absence of questions on Africa (80% vs. 58% of McCain's) and China (74% vs.64%); and on the foreign policy issues of global warming (89% vs. 42%); human rights abuses (85% vs. 57%); AIDS and other diseases (86% vs. 55%); and globalized trade (76% vs. 56%)"
I couldn't agree more with this criticism of Lehrer's questioning. It again begs the question that we have been asking ourselves in class: if third party candidates were allowed to participate in debates, would these questions been asked?
The article also confirms some perceptions we have been discussing, including one held by conservatives of the "liberal media" and liberals of the "conservative media."
"McCain and Obama supporters alike tended to be more critical of the quality of election coverage by traditional broadcast news sources. Nearly 7 out of 10 McCain supporters (69%) rated election coverage by national network news as "poor" (versus 52% of Obama supporters). Nearly 7 out of 10 Obama supporters (68%) counted as "poor" local television news (versus 58% of McCain supporters). "
Though not excessively substantive, I found this article to be interesting for its insistance on good journalism, especially in the debates. This is an issue that needs to be addressed incessantly as the debate season has been opened. Here's to looking forward to the Palin-Biden debate this Thursday.
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
What Now Mr. "The Fundamentals of Our Economy Are Strong?"
McCain announced that he is suspending his campaign beginning today. McCain claims that the the devastation of the current economy requires a postponement of the debate on Friday. Obama has refused the delay.
The media seems to be reacting to the news of this suspension critically and is questioning what's behind it. The quality of coverage in the past week (concerning Palin's reaction to the media, specifically) has undoubtedly gone up in much of the mainstream media. I'm interested to see how this story pans out.
The media seems to be reacting to the news of this suspension critically and is questioning what's behind it. The quality of coverage in the past week (concerning Palin's reaction to the media, specifically) has undoubtedly gone up in much of the mainstream media. I'm interested to see how this story pans out.
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
A Few Funnies
Astoundingly, instead of igniting rage, the news actually made me laugh a few times this weekend. First came Sarah Palin’s reference to a Palin-McCain administration, implying that she is the presidential candidate and McCain the veep. As Olbermann pointed out, maybe it’s a “Freudian slip?” This one is clearly just a mis-speak, but a funny one at least.
John McCain’s mistake last week is not so forgivable. During an interview, McCain was asked if he would meet with Zapatero, Spain’s Prime Minister. McCain’s reply?
“Well, again, I don‘t, all I can tell you is that I have a clear record of working with leaders in the hemisphere that are friends with us and standing up to those who are not, and that‘s judged on the basis of the importance of our relationship with Latin America and the entire region.”
Really, McCain? Really?
After hearing the audio clip, I assume that McCain had trouble understanding the Spanish pronunciation the interviewer read through quickly, which is somewhat understandable. But to just assume that she was referring to a leader of Latin America because it sounded Spanish-y is just dumb. I suppose this is especially funny to me as I just got back from spending a semester abroad in Barcelona, Spain. The election took place while I was living there and I’m still reeling from the differences in media coverage. It seemed like everyone I spoke to was engaged in the Spanish election; I heard countless teenagers shouting “Zap-a-tero! Zap-a-tero!” on the subway for days after the election. Cab drivers spoke to me about the candidates in a truly educated way. Something else I noticed while in Barcelona, was how closely the Spanish papers followed the U.S. primaries. It was almost as if I was getting more news on the U.S. candidates in Spain than I would have if I had stayed in the U.S. And that is just shameful.
John McCain’s mistake last week is not so forgivable. During an interview, McCain was asked if he would meet with Zapatero, Spain’s Prime Minister. McCain’s reply?
“Well, again, I don‘t, all I can tell you is that I have a clear record of working with leaders in the hemisphere that are friends with us and standing up to those who are not, and that‘s judged on the basis of the importance of our relationship with Latin America and the entire region.”
Really, McCain? Really?
After hearing the audio clip, I assume that McCain had trouble understanding the Spanish pronunciation the interviewer read through quickly, which is somewhat understandable. But to just assume that she was referring to a leader of Latin America because it sounded Spanish-y is just dumb. I suppose this is especially funny to me as I just got back from spending a semester abroad in Barcelona, Spain. The election took place while I was living there and I’m still reeling from the differences in media coverage. It seemed like everyone I spoke to was engaged in the Spanish election; I heard countless teenagers shouting “Zap-a-tero! Zap-a-tero!” on the subway for days after the election. Cab drivers spoke to me about the candidates in a truly educated way. Something else I noticed while in Barcelona, was how closely the Spanish papers followed the U.S. primaries. It was almost as if I was getting more news on the U.S. candidates in Spain than I would have if I had stayed in the U.S. And that is just shameful.
Sunday, September 21, 2008
Palin Party Disappears Biden
It was a Palin party last week on MSNBC. Almost every single time the presidential race was mentioned throughout the three-hour viewing period of Hardball, Olbermann, and Maddow, it was in connection to Sarah Palin. But - may I ask - dondé está Biden?
Biden seems to have been left in the dust by the media the past few weeks. Whether this is positive or negative is debateable. Is all coverage good coverage? It's hard to say.
The Republican VP nominee made her first campaign stop in Florida this weekend, where she reportedly stuck to her usual line. The news, of course, is still centered around her persona (which was largely created by the media itself) and her incredible popularity.
"The visit drew a few contrasts between Palin and Obama running mate Joe Biden. The largest was the crowd. Some people had to wait in line about 90 minutes just to park their cars. Biden's largest crowd during a visit earlier this month was about 2,000," according to an AP story linked off of MSNBC.
Palin's even got him beat on Google. A quick search gives around 21 million possible sites for Palin, while Biden tops out around 3 million. Despite the possibility that "Sarah Palin" may be a more popular name than "Joe Biden," (thus suggesting that every site isn't dedicated to the VP nominee) these hits demonstrate perfectly the explosion of Palin-based media frenzy that has occurred in the past few weeks.
Though this was little surprise to me, I do find it unendingly appalling that the media can talk so much about so little.
Biden seems to have been left in the dust by the media the past few weeks. Whether this is positive or negative is debateable. Is all coverage good coverage? It's hard to say.
The Republican VP nominee made her first campaign stop in Florida this weekend, where she reportedly stuck to her usual line. The news, of course, is still centered around her persona (which was largely created by the media itself) and her incredible popularity.
"The visit drew a few contrasts between Palin and Obama running mate Joe Biden. The largest was the crowd. Some people had to wait in line about 90 minutes just to park their cars. Biden's largest crowd during a visit earlier this month was about 2,000," according to an AP story linked off of MSNBC.
Palin's even got him beat on Google. A quick search gives around 21 million possible sites for Palin, while Biden tops out around 3 million. Despite the possibility that "Sarah Palin" may be a more popular name than "Joe Biden," (thus suggesting that every site isn't dedicated to the VP nominee) these hits demonstrate perfectly the explosion of Palin-based media frenzy that has occurred in the past few weeks.
Though this was little surprise to me, I do find it unendingly appalling that the media can talk so much about so little.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)