Perhaps if there had been more substantive reporting on the candidates in the mainstream press, we wouldn't have this problem. It isn't like there hasn't been any information out there to talk about, only that no local media outlet has deemed it newsworthy for some reason.
Instead, we get bland summaries of the candidates' fund raising efforts which tell us next to nothing about who is backing these candidates and why. Reporting on political campaign fund raising this way leaves the impression that we are comparing some innate physical talent of the candidates to draw money toward themselves. And, naturally, the one who demonstrates an ability to suck the most money in is the most innately qualified for office. Then we wonder why we tend to elect such profoundly sucky candidates.
I suppose if you ask the the purveyors of this bland uninformative reporting, they'll tell you it's how they maintain an assurance that they are being fair to every candidate. But pretending that fund raising numbers don't convey information beyond just comparative numbers really isn't being fair to their readers or, for that matter, to anyone but the most well-financed candidate as Clay points out in a comment to a below post.
The MSM will find AZ's posts... Right after Richmond has the Demo nomination all locked up and he faces Cao. $Bill Jr. (after expose) vs. Cao will push Cao back to DC.
And that just sucks all around.
No comments:
Post a Comment