National Media Coverage 'Only getting dumber'

By John A. Tures/Associate Professor of Political Science, LaGrange College/Southern Political Report ~ As amazing as this sounds, the national media coverage of candidates and debates is only getting dumber. 

It has sunk to new lows in 2011. Not only do we hear more from the pundits than candidates, but we’re now picking leaders by internet searches and social networking gimmicks.

Take, for example, the South Carolina debates in June. Media pundits picked Congresswoman Michelle Bachmann as the winner because she announced her candidacy in the middle of the debate. Think about this: You show up at a presidential debate, announce you’re running for president…and that’s the best line in the debate? Why else would you show up, unless you were running? 

Yet that’s what passes for a victory in a debate nowadays. 

It’s a good thing someone announced their candidacy…if everyone did it, who would have won? But that’s not the only reason the media picked her the winner. After that South Carolina debate, pundits also picked Bachmann because (and I am not making this up), she got “Googled” the most. I guess that’s “the new normal” for picking 2011 “winners:” the internet and social network sites.

Share |