but I'm wide awake, so it's time I got this off my chest.
I've been growing progressively more frustrated and angry with the bulk of the televised media and what gets labeled as 'news' in the US. It's opinion, it's hyperbole, and most of it's far from progressive, particularly in regard to the the campaigns for the White House.
I hear precious little on the tube about the true progressives (can you say "catalysts for real change"?) Dennis Kucinich or Mike Gravel, or for that matter about Ron Paul, on the Republican side. What little I do see often appears belittling to me and dismissive. Gravel served 12 years in the US Senate, while Kucinich has served 5 terms in the House and Paul has served 8. I think that warrants at least a modicum of attention and at least some degree of respect.
So with little air time other than what they can purchase, in comparison to the rapt attention being heaped on Obama, Clinton, Edwards, and on Romney, Huckabee, McCain and Guiliani by the media, is there a deliberate attempt by the media to steer the public away from these candidates?
Worse, after the Iowa caucuses, hearing pundits waxing on the tube about the 'demise' of the Clinton campaign, or the implosion of McCain's bid, as if the season is over, rather than just beginning, just irritates me beyond my tolerance. It's political 'race', not a bloody coronation! Tell me what these people want to do for (or worse, to) this country and let me make up my own damn mind about them. I want information, not sound bites. It horrifies me that our electoral process, what so many of us will base our decisions about how we vote, is coming down to sound bites.
I've been growing progressively more frustrated and angry with the bulk of the televised media and what gets labeled as 'news' in the US. It's opinion, it's hyperbole, and most of it's far from progressive, particularly in regard to the the campaigns for the White House.
I hear precious little on the tube about the true progressives (can you say "catalysts for real change"?) Dennis Kucinich or Mike Gravel, or for that matter about Ron Paul, on the Republican side. What little I do see often appears belittling to me and dismissive. Gravel served 12 years in the US Senate, while Kucinich has served 5 terms in the House and Paul has served 8. I think that warrants at least a modicum of attention and at least some degree of respect.
So with little air time other than what they can purchase, in comparison to the rapt attention being heaped on Obama, Clinton, Edwards, and on Romney, Huckabee, McCain and Guiliani by the media, is there a deliberate attempt by the media to steer the public away from these candidates?
Worse, after the Iowa caucuses, hearing pundits waxing on the tube about the 'demise' of the Clinton campaign, or the implosion of McCain's bid, as if the season is over, rather than just beginning, just irritates me beyond my tolerance. It's political 'race', not a bloody coronation! Tell me what these people want to do for (or worse, to) this country and let me make up my own damn mind about them. I want information, not sound bites. It horrifies me that our electoral process, what so many of us will base our decisions about how we vote, is coming down to sound bites.