Or, rather, some observations on the media’s coverage. For good or ill, I always have a browser up during the day to track the markets and news, and I listen to news radio on both sides of my commute. So here’s what I’ve noticed:
Dejected Traders. Someone’s gunning for a photography Pulitzer, trying to find the stock trader showing the most angst. Common poses include the one-handed eye-rub (pictured; photo from www.talkingproud.us), the exasperated heavenward glance, and head in hands on the desk. Are these people—either the traders or their assiduous photo-documentarians—for real? Why is this news? If it is, I fully expect to see photos of anguished ditch-diggers, farmers, massage therapists and IT managers in similar depressed stances when they encounter trouble at work (perhaps a nice spread of some angry Working Americans).
Working Americans. You didn’t hear this one very often prior to last month, but suddenly, “Working Americans” are coming out of the woodwork. They’re a swing voting bloc. They’re “the heart of America”, and, let’s not forget, they’re angry, so incredibly angry. I know there’s a sizeable portion of the population that is not employed, but the rest of us are not some homogenized blob of rage. Last I checked there was a wide range of income, opinion, outlook and political persuasion at my office, and neither my industry nor my town is known for much diversity. Journalists have a responsibility to use (or define) accurate terms when referring to slices of the population, so they should be clear. Rhetoric-laced campaign dispatches are heavy on stereotypes, and when the media uses the same terms, it shows laziness, ineptitude, or both.
Irritating Campaign Advisors. I know, this is news of the tautological—what do we really expect? But the economic teams from both presidential campaigns are driving me up the wall. To pick just one example, there’s the practice of continuous repetition of the candidates’ full names in every sentence. “Barack Obama will put $500 in every Working American’s pocket. That’s what Barack Obama will do. You can trust that Barack Obama will do what’s best for the American People, because Barack Obama has the vision to lead us out of this crisis.” (Newsflash: 1. It’s okay to use a pronoun every once in a while; give it a try sometime, and 2. Unless you say something incredibly stupid or controversial, you are not important enough to be quoted outside of the interview, so there will be no confusion about a remark taken out of context; really.)
Pandering and Finger-pointing. Again, what can we really expect? I imagine many NPR listeners are just waiting for the journalists to sock it to the conservative Wall Street types who agree to appear on their programs. “But don’t you think that this past month has been a vindication for those who have said all along that trickle-down economics is a flawed concept?” This has to be journalistic objectivity at its finest. Or perhaps it’s this one: “Should Obama have clamped down on Fannie and Freddie, instead of looking the other way, so that we wouldn’t be in this mess?” Yes, blame the guy who first came into office after the high-rise house of cards was already constructed, because he was too clueless to stop the renovation of the penthouse. There’s plenty of blame to go around.
I expect this nonsense to continue for some time to come, but that doesn’t mean I have to like it. In a way I feel a lot like the guy pictured at the top of the post, with the DJIA down again today over 700 points. At least when I rub my eyes wearily, the paparazzi aren’t there to preserve it for posterity.
No comments:
Post a Comment