After Another Historic Change Election, More Of The Same

There is a tradition of contrition for presidents who have just been rejected in midterm elections: A sober press conference, a public rededication to concerns of voters, a visible attempt at approximating candor.

And so President Obama gathered a couple hundred reporters in the East Room on Wednesday to dutifully take “responsibility” for the election’s outcome, without really admitting any fault. “It feels bad,” he said, before joking about liking Slurpees, complaining about the White House bubble, and diving deep into the Thesaurus for a word to describe his experience last night: “Shellacking.”

This word excited the press corps, which needed an Obama-appropriate verb to set alongside George W. Bush’s self-described “thumpin’” in 2006. But otherwise, it did not matter at all—none of it really. The press conference was a formality, an official checking of the moving-on box. It was more theater for an American public sick of political theater.

And herein lies the problem. Tuesday night was the third consecutive election in which the American public has soundly rejected the Washington ways of politics by tossing out those in power. As before, the only way Americans have of expressing this displeasure is to fire those in charge, who they view as either corrupt or incapable. More often than not, the replacements distinguish themselves by professing an even stronger ideological commitment than the last ones. Then they misinterpret their election as an ideological mandate, forcing more posturing on principal, less agreement across party lines, and the cycle repeats itself.

Wash. Rinse. Repeat. And the public frustration builds.

The day after the 2010 landslide election was just another day in Washington, and as such another bad day for the nation’s troubled democracy. Voters who turned out Democrats, voting once again for change, were rewarded with more poses and posturing. Speaker-in-waiting John Boehner and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell held a press conference 90 minutes before Obama to announce that they are happily awaiting a policy pivot from the White House. “I think the group that should hopefully get the message out of yesterday’s elections is our friends on the other side of the aisle,” said McConnell. “And we hope that they will pivot in a different direction, work with us on things.”

This was a bargaining position. Republicans were announcing their new power, and inviting President Obama to join them. It was an echo of the approach Obama had used when he first arrived in the White House, when he announced to the Republican caucus that “elections have consequences.”

In response, Obama announced that he would be willing to work with Republicans if they really wanted to work with him and were willing to negotiate. But they would have to be serious. “As I said before, no person, no party has a monopoly on wisdom,” he said. “And that’s why I’m eager to hear good ideas wherever they come from, whoever proposes them. And that’s why I believe it’s important to have an honest and civil debate about the choices that we face.”

In the first two years of his presidency, these sort of statements from Obama were code. They meant Obama was confident that he had superior policy ideas, and was not interested in debating bigger philosophical issues like whether or not government should mandate health care coverage, or regulate credit card contracts, or put a price on carbon emissions. Then he went ahead and pushed his plans through Congress on the back of his significant Democratic majorities, making exactly as many changes as were necessary for the bare minimum of votes. It remains to be seen if these words now mean something different with Republicans in charge of the House.

Both Obama and Republican leaders now have the same incentives: They want to claim the high ground of reasonable leadership without ceding much ideological terrain. Neither side trusts the other, and it will take months before the country knows whether they can all work together as the American people clearly want. But to reach that point they must first feel each other out, and that means lots more political theater, like we had today, which is not what the American people asked for when they went to the polls.

Related Topics: Uncategorized
  • Latest on Swampland

    The Phony War: Obama and Romney Are Debating Character, Not Policy

    More than five months from Election Day, the back-and-forth about Mitt Romney’s record at Bain already feels played out. Unfortunately, there’s good reason to expect the campaign continues in this vein indefinitely. Neither Barack Obama nor Mitt Romney are terribly interested in dwelling on policy platforms. Romney’s plan to slash spending and keep taxes low on the wealthy isn’t especially popular, at least not at any level of detail beyond a blithe promise to shrink the deficit. Meanwhile, Obama’s signature first-term achievements, like health care, the stimulus and Wall Street reform, are all unpopular or tricky to sell. (The Dodd-Frank bill is the most popular of these, but hyping it means offending wealthy donors.) So what we’re getting instead is a superficial duel about character–and, worse, one that’s based on the largely false premise that the better man can better “manage” the economy back to health.

    Obama Administration Blocks Global Health Fund To Fight Disease In Developing NationsHuffPost Politics

    Audacity of Dope: Tales of a Toking Teenage Obama

    We knew Barack Obama smoked weed in high school because he wrote about it in his books. What we didn’t know, until Buzzfeed posted these choice nuggets (I’m so sorry) from David Maraniss’s new book on the President’s younger years, were the giggle-worthy details of his “Choom Gang” lifestyle, which are right out of a buddy stoner flick. Obama and his friends drove around the lush Hawaii countryside, hot-boxing their VW bus and re-upping with a long-haired pizza-tossing dealer named Ray, whom Obama thanked in his yearbook “for all the good times.”

  • Paul-no not that one

    “and as such another bad day for the nation’s troubled democracy.”
    .
    What, if any, part does the media play in what you describe as a “troubled democracy”?

  • deconstructiva

    Alas, Michael, didn’t the R’s already tip their hand when McConnell said he wants to make sure Obama is a one-termer? So how is any dealmaking possible?

  • grape_crush

    Not bad, Michael.

    Wash. Rinse. Repeat. And the public frustration builds.

    And it will continue to until we meaningfully reform how our government works. Start with the disproportionate influence money has on the electoral and legislative processes.

  • http://gum0nshoe.wordpress.com gumOnShoe

    I solidly agree with your conclusion. Tired of the crap. Start governing. And that goes for everyone regardless of party.
    ·
    However, in two years, I’m not going to forget who ground government to a halt these last two years. Sorry, you screwed up, and you know who you are.

  • http://www.inworldstudios.com jayackroyd

    Actually, this election was a repudiation of the 3rd way, the New Democrats, and their commitment to partnership with large oligopolies, like Goldman, Verizon, Pfizer, Monsanto. It wasn’t a commitment to the Republican ideologues who believe not in partnership, but in simple largesse–of rewarding those companies without any concessions in return.
    .
    2006 and 2008 were a rejection of Bush’s crony capitalism, and the devastating effect it was having on middle America, with wage growth halted, 401Ks wrecked and the fraudulent housing bubble burst. 2010 is a rejection of the the New Democrat response, of using what atrios calls bank shots–subsidies of corporate entities large and small–to drive job growth, rather than creating public sector jobs. Geithner’s MTP appearance, and Obama’s conversation with atrios et al reinforced the notion that the only jobs that matter are private sector jobs–a watchword of the New Democrat’s desire to run the country through the business elites.
    .
    Nothing will change until there is a leader willing to confront the sources of the problems we face, which are largely tied to corporate oligopolies wedded to the government in telecommunications, energy, health care, “national security,” agribusiness and finance. None of those industries face competition, at best. More accurately, these industries are propped up the government, and then use their positions to gouge consumers, when they are not literally stealing their homes from them.
    .
    The voters, “grimly resigned” in the words of the New York Times, are voting out this set of rascals in the vain hope that the next set will actually evince some concern for the policy failures of the last ten years. They wouldn’t put it that way. Rather, they want to grow old and retire in the home they’ve spent their lives in, with their children having more opportunity than they have.
    .
    The GOP in power punctured that dream. The Democrats in power didn’t repair the damage. So the voters had no choice but to try the other guys again. Holding their noses.

  • gysgt213

    The trouble for Obama is that in this climate no one cares about excuses, explanations or his obession with reaching out to the other side. Nobody gives a crap if he works out a bill with the republicans and the republicans have no desire to work out any bill with him. Its all talk and phoney photo op crap.
    .
    If in the begining, he had not begun so many battles from the weakest position possible he might have some real victories behind him that would made tougher stuff easier. The bills would have still been watered down, but not to the point of being completely ineffective. He could have passed a public works and infrastructure bill that would have created some jobs. A health care bill that did not require people with no jobs to buy insurance with money they don’t have. He would have never dealt with the drug companies behind closed doors and prevented us from negotiating prices. He would have stood up to wall street.
    .
    But then again he really had no real desire to do anything but what he did and now for his troubles he will get investigated to death by the party he wants to reach out to. Good luck with that.

  • lilaland

    I’m for one glad that Obama did not cower and sting republican toes. What a sad weak man he would have appeared to be. He was somber and serious.. understood the reality that the consequence of the election meant much of his agenda would now never get passed and seem will to work with the republicans on finding middle ground.
    It seemed refreshing to see the man face reality in such a noble way.
    However, I’m sure republicans are shrilling that he is arrogant because he is not sucking their toes. *shudder*

    You know… the exit polls showed Americans were worried about job creation and the economy and remembered the days of prosperity under Clinton in the 90′s when the POTUS and senate were democrats and congress was republican. They said 35% thought big banks were to blame, 25% blamed Bush and only 23% blamed Obama for the economy. That does not seem like a total rejection by any means. It seems like the middle want Obama and Congress to work together like under Clinton.

    I’m thinking it would be very foolish for republicans to misread the election when they just got a second chance. What the tea-party wants and what swing voters want do not add up to the same thing. In this election.. both groups are mad.. but for different reasons.

    Democrats need to start crafting legislation that appeals to swing voters. Then the republicans can reject it. again and again and again.. then the republicans can shut down the house while the democrats keep offering legislation crafted to please the middle.

    We live in a political world. That is reality.
    My feet ache.. and my toes nails are painted.. you could suck them if you like.

  • http://www.inworldstudios.com jayackroyd
  • http://shortplaysaboutrealpeople.wordpress.com Michael Maiello

    I know I’m supposed to agree with your assertion that people want an end to partisan bickering and for the government to act. But it’s just not true. People want the government to act, sure, but they want the government to act the way they want the government to act.

    The general mood of the populace isn’t “Let’s find the middle ground!” I don’t know anybody who thinks that we should have half-socialized medicine. Nobody thinks we should pull half the troops out of Afghanistan. There’s no appetite for half a middle class tax cut or for caps instead of cap and trade or every other same sex marriage or any of that.

    Nope… when people say “the government should stop bickering and get to work” they really mean “the government should shut up and do what I want.”

    And that’s okay. Heck, it’s probably a good thing. The worst answer to an argument like: “I want to send a man to Mars” and “I don’t want to send a man to Mars” would be to send a man halfway to Mars and then let him float there.

    Most of the really good ideas, from either side of the aisle are things that you either do or you don’t do. There’s no meaningful half way.

  • newfreedomblog

    Despite the “yea, we were shellacked” do you really thing Bozo-the-clown is actually going to do things any differently than he has already to date?

  • http://shortplaysaboutrealpeople.wordpress.com Michael Maiello

    Nope. But when El Chimpo got “thumped” in 2006 he didn’t do anything differently either. But then I always knew these types of people have more in common with each other than they do with any of us.

  • http://www.albanianminerals.com Sahit Muja

    Sahit Muja, New York: U.S President Barack Obama said he will seek common ground with Republicans
    U.S President Barack Obama said he will seek common ground with Republicans.
    Obama Promised compromising with Republicans today.
    Voters to President Obama yes We can get you out of the White House in 2012. Voters to President Obama We are tired of empty promises. Republicans win swiping victory in this election, The American People have spoken .The voice of the people is clear to all elected officials. President Obama and Democrats must find common ground with Republicans to work in reducing the taxes, create jobs, reduce the deficit and move our nation forward.
    The Obama campaign was the finest political marketing strategy in the US history . Elected with a huge majority in both the House and Senate, President Obama saw an opportunity to enact into law every cherished belief of the Democratic Party. President Obama ignore totally the Republicans and the will of American people.
    The Elite Democrats in Washington are so completely self-absorbed they actually believe everyone thinks like they do, and those that don’t are fools. This Arrogance from Democrat’s within is what’s crumbling the Democratic empire. President Obama and Democrats went on a blatant full speed ahead power grabbing, they behaved like greedy children .
    The actions of the Democratic leadership, Obama, Pelosi, Reid… Have sealed the fates of the Democrats in this election. Using their control of the legislative and executive branches to pass pet social engineering projects instead of focusing on the economy will cost the Democrats dearly on election night. Local and state governments need to slash their budgets to live off whatever tax revenues they generate
    Sahit Muja
    Albanian Minerals, New York.

  • http://gum0nshoe.wordpress.com gumOnShoe

    I’d agree up to a point. Yeah, a lot of what you’re talking about exists and is bad for the country; oligarchies. But, I don’t believe the common man who voted sees that. I honestly think they based their votes on emotional appeals which fit their narrow world views, and that beyond that they probably believed every second they were doing the right thing.
    ·
    Republicans really wanted things to change. Democrats were complacent. Republicans got what they thought they wanted. In two years they’ll wake up and go, that’s not what I wanted, just like the Democrats did. They don’t actually know what they are voting for anymore and that is the real problem. There are no real choices.

  • acgt

    “… as the American people clearly want.” I don’t think so.

    Truly, the American people are politically inconsistent, and clueless, as Joe said ignorant. We do not know what we really want. With much bragging, we are unable to “handle the truth” and reality.

  • http://www.inworldstudios.com jayackroyd

    I am not saying voters walked into the booth and said “Oh, that 3rd way thing turned out to have been a bad idea, and so I am going to vote Republican instead.”
    .
    I am saying that voters want jobs, a home and a secure future. Their only way of expressing that is vote against whoever is in office when they feel those elements are threatened. Policies that cost them hours on the job, threaten them with layoffs, endanger their home ownership, risk bankruptcy from illness, and visibly enrich the swells still further are going to be unpopular. The people who implemented the policy will be held responsible.
    .
    Those who created the failed policy are punished by its effects on the voter’s life and livelihood. The 3rd way policies that had the disastrous effects of massive unemployment, a ruined housing market, and expensive crappy health care are the sources of dissatisfaction. THe effects, not the legislation. Rahm and Obama’s self-praise for passing “historic” legislation means nothing if people don’t have jobs and fear foreclosure.

  • http://gum0nshoe.wordpress.com gumOnShoe

    Let’s chalk this up to me misinterpreting what you meant then.

  • lancedal

    Michael: I think you should switch over to Fox News. Seriously. Your kind of logic doesn’t fit for reasonable people.

    What “fault” does he need to admit? Is it his fault that the repub vote no on everything without offer any alternative? Can’t help there.

    This election is about JOB, JOB, and JOB and you can’t blame him for not giving back all the JOB that lost. I knew people who lost their job in 2006, yet blamed Obama. Goes figure.

    American have a diet problem. When they happy, they eat too much. Then with a sagging belly, they expect some one some where to make it disappear tomorrow. When that didn’t happen, they pissed. So what happen when they pissed? they blame it on somebody.

  • w00diee

    The day before the election, my insurance bill came in at 15% higher than last year. Nothing else in this economy when up 15% except my insurance bills. We didn’t reform insurance because the GOP didn’t want to. So thanks for nothing. I expect more nothing in the days to come. Maybe we can get into another trillion dollar war? Maybe another recession to go with it. Go for it GOP’s.

  • lilaland

    I would also like to point out the slurpee joke was a very telling moment. Sometimes if we don’t laugh we would cry. Obama holding his chin up after taking such a hard beating was very moving. His seeking a lighter moment in such a hard time so much a reflection of his humanity. Ronald Reagan shared that “lightening up” so one does not fall into immobile despondency.. Obama is the leader of his party… and seeing him too beaten or broken would not only scare the left but scare our nation.
    hold your head up. In private he can cry.
    I find your article so insightful… and a total projection of what you yourself are doing in it.

  • http://jcapan.wordpress.com jcapan

    “But otherwise, it did not matter at all—none of it really.”

    So far, so good. I wonder if you felt this way when you were in J-school–that most of our public discourse amounts to kabuki. Or as the bard put it:

    All the world’s a stage,
    And all the men and women merely players;
    They have their exits and their entrances

    “Tuesday night was the third consecutive election in which the American public has soundly rejected the Washington ways of politics by tossing out those in power. As before, the only way Americans have of expressing this displeasure is to fire those in charge, who they view as either corrupt or incapable.”

    Well put. And like a pendulum, whether it’s 2012, 2014 or … it’ll inevitably lurch the other way. Americans’ views are correct–but it’s b/c the duopoly is corrupt that they are incapable. If they weren’t corrupt, they could solve all of our problems, not magically or within a season of their favorite TV show, but the long and arduous task of restoring the nation, from it’s flirtation with a banana republic, is still within our reach. Sadly, until they have an actual choice, of a non-corrupt actor, rinse and repeat and your industry’s filtration, is all they’ll be left to, well, at least until the sh!t hits the proverbial fan.

    “More often than not, the replacements distinguish themselves by professing an even stronger ideological commitment than the last ones. Then they misinterpret their election as an ideological mandate, forcing more posturing on principal, less agreement across party lines, and the cycle repeats itself.”

    Fine, but more on what these ideologies are about would be helpful, b/c you realize that the vast majority of your readership interprets Obama’s ideology as liberal, and that most of your cohorts view him as having moved too far left. So, what exactly is his ideology–is it closer to that which is held by the GOP, or is it related at all to that now quaint relic, American liberalism. Is it that he was too rigid and uncompromising with the ostensible opposition from the right or is there another group of politicians and thinkers out there, whose ideology has been ignored and insulted for 30+ years, coincidentally around the time America (read Robert Reich) began it’s slow, now rapidly quickening descent.

    And, oh yeah, as Jay-ack noted, what Ian said.

  • Exiled_At_Home (formerly Neo)

    Tip their hand? As if it wasn’t something we all already knew? Look, any politician who tells you that he doesn’t want the opposition party to lose out in the elections is lying. Every politician is hoping to get himself elected, his party back in the majority, and/or capture the Presidency, that sort of entails the other party not doing likewise, yes? So, the mere simple fact that Republicans don’t want Obama to be elected to a second term is hardly evidence that no brokering can follow. Were that the case, there would never be any compromise. Period.

  • http://derekg.wordpress.com/ Derek

    I think we are all in agreement that compromise is necessary. There is no need to repeat that another 5 million times.

    What we need now are some actual ideas and the perfect compromises associated with those ideas.

    First, I suppose, we need to settle on the criteria that both sides will use to distinguish between good and bad ideas. For example, is an idea a good idea if it is supported with facts or is the number of insults included in a set of arguments the most important factor.

    Anyway, I’m sure we all want compromise.

  • apr2563

    Michael: Your cynical, world weary post is so sad. No where do you include the traditional media in your review of the ongoing political merry go round.
    .
    Please, what have you done to make the issues not the process the focus of your reporting? What have you done to expose the corruption of corporate money on both parties? What have you done to expose the unwillingness of a corporate media to take unpopular stands? What have you done to deligitimize the Fox Propaganda Network and its corrupt influence of first building up the TPers and then co-opting them?
    .
    I am not saying that you and your peers have not done some reporting on the above issues. However, there has been little follow through and little intensity when compared with the attention paid to O’Donnell’s every utterances, Palin’s ghostwritten tweets and Facebook comments, and amusement at the destructive Beck and LImbaugh comments.

  • flameworker

    You’re joking, right? The Republicans will vote “NO” on Boehner’s confirmation out of habit.

  • deserveliberty

    Michael: Two additional points that you may want to consider.

    1. Indeed there are things that voters can do to influence the process, and these things were attempted valiantly over the course of the last two years in the desert. The voters showed up at townhall meetings, and the voters showed up in DC, by the millions – both in attempts to get the attention of the Ruling Class. Yet, the elitist, ivory tower politicians failed to notice the little people, as did the media refuse to acknowledge the validity of the presence of the ‘unwashed’ in the oh-so sparkling city that is the moral swamp of DC.

    2. There continues a presumption among some that governance is something that the government is expected to do to the people – at least something that it does to the people who are not intellectually talented enough to be in government. This is a false premise that is counter to the founding of our nation. It is counter (fortunately) to the spirit of freedom that still dwells within the American people.

  • liberalmeltdown

    California is a perfect illustration of more of the same. The state assembly has an 8% approval rating, yet the Democrats vote to return the same people over and over. The state is bankrupt. It has been the progressive liberal testing ground for the last 20 years. Even the people that believe in liberalism don’t like the results, yet they continue to serve up Boxer, Brown, and the same old tax and spend liberals.

  • earljr1

    These people never learn, liberalmeltdown, they are convinced moonbeam Jerry will put a chicken in every pot and Unicorns will once again traipse through LaLa land. With Pelosi, Boxer and Maxine Waters being elected time after time, the IQ of your democratic base is highly suspect, at best. People like little kevie, progressive apologist personified, provide evidence this species has escaped and is now breeding elsewhere. Be on the alert, America, they were defeated politically but can still be a threat to our national security.

  • http://www.inworldstudios.com jayackroyd

    You might be interested in this Netroots Nation panel in Summer 2009. Topic was whether Obama could take advantage of the transformative opportunity Bob Kuttner described in his book, Obama’s challenge.
    .
    Ian, Mike Lux, digby, Eric Massa.
    .
    http://www.netrootsnation.org/node/1336
    .
    Ian talks about the failure to act boldly on financial issues. Massa talks about health care options. Mike Lux about previous transformations (American revolution, Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, FDR, LBJ). Digby sums up.
    .
    I am mean to people asking question at the end. But I can’t stand people who filibuster the mic.

  • certifiablylazy

    This is an opportunity to thank the both of you for conducting your comments these past couple years in a manner that was both reasonable and respectful. You continue on with a solid and remarkable pattern.

  • http://jcapan.wordpress.com jcapan

    Thanks Jay. Will watch it as I eat my bento.

  • abdullah69

    The Republicans got what they wanted. Loads of people running round with guns and a weak and ineffectual government. The US gets more like Somalia every day.

  • maurice2u

    I keep hearing this sentiment on the Swamp and it must be pointed out: Time, CNN, FOX, MSNBC, and whatever other “news source” people wish to blame owe you nothing. Zip. Zero. Nada.
    .
    Like it or not, they are not public servants. They have no mandate to look out for public good. They are not “the 4th estate”. They are just people like the rest of us with jobs. Their job happens to be making money as a part of the entertainment industry. No different than a comic book, a sit-com, a cartoon, or a reality TV show. They provide media content, and we choose to consume or to not consume.
    .
    The reality of the matter is that (on average) Americans rather be entertained than educated, and we rather play/consume than work/sacrifice. The businesses that thrive on that are doing what any smart business should do, capitalize on our tendancies. If Americans (on average) value something more than what the “news” is giving us, they sure don’t act like it. We may give lip service about it, but we’re not speaking with our wallets, and that is the only language those companies speak.
    .
    TLDR: Stop complaining about “the media”. It doesn’t exist. Those people are us, and the product they present and others consume is just a reflection of our society overall. Fix the source, they are just a symptom.

  • herby002

    19.2 – This is an opportunity to thank the both of you for conducting your comments these past couple years in a manner that was both reasonable and respectful. You continue on with a solid and remarkable pattern.

    You forgot to add:

  • reallynotsurprised

    Doesn’t the short term outcome matter – especially in economic recessions?

    Let’s keep to the economics then. The world wonders why Americans will throw out the guys who stopped the economic freefall, helped turn economic contractions into (limited) growth within two years.

    Shouldn’t the strategy be to grow the economy, get the employment numbers up, earn more income, hopefully build some surplus and bring down the deficit down? in that order? appeared that Clinton did it some time ago.

    Now americans have instead elected the guys who engineered the free-fall and got themselves in a situation where the government potentially will be in a logjam for the next two years with Rs and Ds hammering and filibustering each other for awhile.

    The world has seen this type of “rational” election before. When W was re-elected in 04′

    Good luck guys. You just may bring the whole world down in recession again.

  • herby002

    1.1 – maurice2u,

    “Like it or not, they are not public servants. They have no mandate to look out for public good. They are not “the 4th estate”.”

    Yes, they are. They’re supposed to answer to “a higher calling”. We hope that they, having accepted the job, will meet its minimum ethical standards.

    If I buy meat from a butcher, I assume/hope that he is not selling me spoiled meat; at the least, I assume that the chicken meat he sells me is not turkey, and that its weight isn’t 14 ounces instead of the 16 ounces I pay for.

    If I send my child to church, I’d like to assume that the priest/preacher won’t molest the kid, because there is a moral/ethical standard that they are supposed to meet in order to hold that office.

    If I buy 4 gallons of fuel at a gas station, I assume that 4 gallons gets pumped into my car’s tank…

    Never mind; forget what I just said. According to the TeaPublicans we just elected to office, all these people are welcome to transgress against me or mine in their pursuit of some-kind-of-profit – and my only recourse is to rightwing activist courts.

  • liberalmeltdown

    The liberals in California are certifiable crazies. They will never man up and accept the blame, but the blame is on them, nevertheless. There is nobody else to blame in California. They elected Jerry Brown, again. Certifiable.

  • http://milascurtains.wordpress.com milascurtains

    hmmmmm
    did anybody hear any idea from “winners”?
    except the one and only – fire Obama?

    is it the remedy to restore America?
    Hell – NO

  • maurice2u

    Apologies for the late reply herby002.
    .
    Unfortunately you are mistaken in the context you meant, even if literally your words are closer to the truth.
    .
    Your “hopes” and “assumptions” are just that. Relatively meaningless, and I say that with no malice towards you, I mean the new sources you are talking about find your “hopes” meaningless. What forces the hands of the entities you described is profit – PERIOD.
    .
    What forces the butcher’s meat (from your example) to be safe is regulation – IE: inspections and laws that say the meat must be safe or they will be penalized and/or shut down. Similar restrictions are in place for gasoline, etc. With respect to churches, there is a moralistic pledge to act with regard to public good, but there is also the unspoken incentive that dictates a happy following keeps members and breaking of said trust leads to a church’s dismantling (at least on a localized level).
    .
    The regulations and/or moralistic pledges in media services simply do not exist. Not in today’s world at least. There are no “factual information only” laws, and public consumption has proven to the media companies that we don’t really care about that as a majority. Someone else here on the swamp can undoubtedly give a better recolection of the law changes in the 70′s that kind of set ‘news’ on this path, but the facts are pretty clear. If America wanted to be informed they’d be watching C-SPAN and maybe some stuff on NASA, Discovery, Science, and PBS channels but that stuff is boring.
    .
    We want to be entertained, That is what we’re willing to pay for (and make no mistake that is what we’re doing when we watch/read it even if we spend no direct dollars), and that is what dominates. Yes it is sad, but the 1st step towards recovery is acknowledgement of the problem.

blog comments powered by Disqus