Op-Ed
Media critics often say that visual images trump words. The claim
makes some sense: Pictures have major impacts on how we see the world.
And we’re apt to pay less attention to photo captions or the voice-overs
that accompany news footage on TV screens.
But when images meet the eye, our reactions depend on our sense of context. The same news outlets that select certain photos and video snippets also influence how we look at what we see. The pictures can have political clout because of prevalent assumptions and attitudes largely shaped by media.
Many people reacted strongly to President Bush’s “top gun” imitation when he jetted onto an aircraft carrier near San Diego a couple of months ago. Bush fans and pliable journalists swooned. More skeptical observers noticed the shameless manipulation. But everyone was looking at identical images. The determining factor was not the choreography of the photo-op but the outlooks of those who watched.
But when images meet the eye, our reactions depend on our sense of context. The same news outlets that select certain photos and video snippets also influence how we look at what we see. The pictures can have political clout because of prevalent assumptions and attitudes largely shaped by media.
Many people reacted strongly to President Bush’s “top gun” imitation when he jetted onto an aircraft carrier near San Diego a couple of months ago. Bush fans and pliable journalists swooned. More skeptical observers noticed the shameless manipulation. But everyone was looking at identical images. The determining factor was not the choreography of the photo-op but the outlooks of those who watched.
The corporate Democrats who greased Bill Clinton's path to the
White House are now a bit worried. Their influence on the party's
presidential nomination process has slipped. But the Democratic
Leadership Council can count on plenty of assistance from mainstream
news media.
For several years leading up to 1992, the DLC curried favor with high-profile political journalists as they repeated the mantra that the Democratic Party needed to be centrist. Co-founded by Clinton in the mid-1980s, the DLC emphasized catering to "middle class" Americans -- while the organization filled its coffers with funding from such non-middle-class bastions as the top echelons of corporate outfits like Arco, Prudential-Bache, Dow Chemical, Georgia Pacific and Martin Marietta.
For several years leading up to 1992, the DLC curried favor with high-profile political journalists as they repeated the mantra that the Democratic Party needed to be centrist. Co-founded by Clinton in the mid-1980s, the DLC emphasized catering to "middle class" Americans -- while the organization filled its coffers with funding from such non-middle-class bastions as the top echelons of corporate outfits like Arco, Prudential-Bache, Dow Chemical, Georgia Pacific and Martin Marietta.
AUSTIN, Texas -- You've got to hand it to those clever little
problem-solvers at the White House. What a bunch of brainiacs. They have
resolved the entire problem of global warming: They cut it out of the
report!
This is genius. Everybody else is maundering on about the oceans rising and the polar icecaps melting and monster storms and hideous droughts, and these guys just ... edit it out.
"The editing eliminated references to many studies concluding that warming is at least partly caused by rising concentrations of smokestack and tailpipe emissions, and could threaten health and ecosystems," reports The New York Times. Presto -- poof!
This is genius. Everybody else is maundering on about the oceans rising and the polar icecaps melting and monster storms and hideous droughts, and these guys just ... edit it out.
"The editing eliminated references to many studies concluding that warming is at least partly caused by rising concentrations of smokestack and tailpipe emissions, and could threaten health and ecosystems," reports The New York Times. Presto -- poof!
AUSTIN, Texas -- Food fight! Here's a beauty: to vote or not to vote, to favor or not to favor the Medicare Prescription Drug Bill?
Theoretically, everybody's in favor of a plan to help senior citizens with prescription drug costs, which are truly appalling. Many seniors literally have to choose between their meds or food. Everyone agrees it's awful -- the question is whether the bills currently in the House and Senate are actually an improvement.
Those of you who make up your minds based on the if-he's-for-it, I'm-against-it method (quite a few people seem to be doing that these days) are in deep doo-doo on this one. True, Ted Kennedy is for it, and The Wall Street Journal is against it. On the other hand, the White House is for it, and pretty much everyone on the left except Kennedy is against it. The press is helpfully wringing its hands and announcing, "This is soooo complicated."
Theoretically, everybody's in favor of a plan to help senior citizens with prescription drug costs, which are truly appalling. Many seniors literally have to choose between their meds or food. Everyone agrees it's awful -- the question is whether the bills currently in the House and Senate are actually an improvement.
Those of you who make up your minds based on the if-he's-for-it, I'm-against-it method (quite a few people seem to be doing that these days) are in deep doo-doo on this one. True, Ted Kennedy is for it, and The Wall Street Journal is against it. On the other hand, the White House is for it, and pretty much everyone on the left except Kennedy is against it. The press is helpfully wringing its hands and announcing, "This is soooo complicated."
Early summer has brought a flurry of public discussion about a
topic previously confined to political margins -- the possibility of
impeaching President George W. Bush. The idea is still far from the
national media echo chamber, but some rumblings are now audible as
people begin to think about the almost unthinkable.
A few generations of Americans are apt to view impeachment as an extreme step. One factor has been John F. Kennedy's widely read 1956 book "Profiles in Courage," which captured a Pulitzer Prize. The book devoted a chapter to lauding Sen. Edmund G. Ross of Kansas, whose "not guilty" vote prevented the Senate from convicting an impeached president, Andrew Johnson, on May 26, 1868.
In real life, Ross -- who promptly put the squeeze on President Johnson for a series of patronage appointments -- was hardly the idealist that Kennedy's book cracked him up to be. But the chapter's melodrama popularized a negative image of impeachment.
A few generations of Americans are apt to view impeachment as an extreme step. One factor has been John F. Kennedy's widely read 1956 book "Profiles in Courage," which captured a Pulitzer Prize. The book devoted a chapter to lauding Sen. Edmund G. Ross of Kansas, whose "not guilty" vote prevented the Senate from convicting an impeached president, Andrew Johnson, on May 26, 1868.
In real life, Ross -- who promptly put the squeeze on President Johnson for a series of patronage appointments -- was hardly the idealist that Kennedy's book cracked him up to be. But the chapter's melodrama popularized a negative image of impeachment.
AUSTIN, Texas -- My, my, my, the great Iraqi Gold Rush is on,
and who should be there at the front of the line, right along with
Halliburton and Bechtel, but our old friends at WorldCom, perpetrator of the
largest accounting fraud in American history.
WorldCom, shortly to become MCI, has been given a contract worth $45 million in the short term to build a wireless phone network in Iraq. I learned via The Associated Press that Washington Technology, a trade newspaper that follows computing-related sales to the U.S. government, "found WorldCom jumped to eighth among all federal technology contractors in 2002, with $772 million in government sales." And that is only counting the deals in which WorldCom is the primary contractor. It is actually getting much more as a subcontractor.
WorldCom, shortly to become MCI, has been given a contract worth $45 million in the short term to build a wireless phone network in Iraq. I learned via The Associated Press that Washington Technology, a trade newspaper that follows computing-related sales to the U.S. government, "found WorldCom jumped to eighth among all federal technology contractors in 2002, with $772 million in government sales." And that is only counting the deals in which WorldCom is the primary contractor. It is actually getting much more as a subcontractor.
AUSTIN, Texas -- Watching some dipstick the other day on Fox
News carry on with great certainty about Hillary Clinton and her evil
motives -- and I don't think this guy actually spends a lot of time tete a tete with Mrs. Clinton while she reveals her deepest
thoughts to him -- I wondered, "Lord, when are these people going to get
over it?"
I think the answer is never, because most people have a very hard time forgiving those whom they have deeply wronged. I know that's sort of counterintuitive, but think about some of the bad divorces you have known. When we have done something terrible to someone, we often need to twist it around so it's their fault, not ours.
So we continue to suffer this deformity in our public life because of what Sid Blumenthal calls "this perverse episode," the scoundrel time.
I think the answer is never, because most people have a very hard time forgiving those whom they have deeply wronged. I know that's sort of counterintuitive, but think about some of the bad divorces you have known. When we have done something terrible to someone, we often need to twist it around so it's their fault, not ours.
So we continue to suffer this deformity in our public life because of what Sid Blumenthal calls "this perverse episode," the scoundrel time.
In a democracy, leaders must earn and retain the public's trust. No
matter how loudly those leaders proclaim their dedication to
fighting terrorism, we must not flinch from examining whether they
are trustworthy.
On March 17, 2003, in a major address to the American people, President George W. Bush declared: "Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised." On April 10, in a televised message to the people of Iraq, Prime Minister Tony Blair said: "We did not want this war. But in refusing to give up his weapons of mass destruction, Saddam gave us no choice but to act."
Before and during the war on Iraq, we heard many other such statements from top officials in Washington and London. Ostensibly they justified the war.
On March 17, 2003, in a major address to the American people, President George W. Bush declared: "Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised." On April 10, in a televised message to the people of Iraq, Prime Minister Tony Blair said: "We did not want this war. But in refusing to give up his weapons of mass destruction, Saddam gave us no choice but to act."
Before and during the war on Iraq, we heard many other such statements from top officials in Washington and London. Ostensibly they justified the war.
LONDON -- The people of Britain and the United States are
living in parallel, yet substantively different, media universes.
Bonds of language and overlaps of mass culture are obvious. But a
visit to London quickly illuminates the reality that mainstream
journalism is much less narrow here than in America.
One indicator of a robust press: Nearly a dozen ideologically diverse national daily papers are competing on British newsstands.
Granted, the picture isn't all rosy. Tabloids feature lurid crime headlines and include exploitive photos of bare-breasted women. Several major newspapers reflect the distorting effects of right-wing owners like Rupert Murdoch (who has succeeded in foisting the execrable Fox News on the United States). And the circulation figures of Britain's dailies show that the size of press runs is inversely proportional to journalistic quality, with the Sun at 3.5 million and the Daily Mail at 2.3 million -- in contrast to two superb dailies, the Guardian (381,000) and the Independent (186,000).
One indicator of a robust press: Nearly a dozen ideologically diverse national daily papers are competing on British newsstands.
Granted, the picture isn't all rosy. Tabloids feature lurid crime headlines and include exploitive photos of bare-breasted women. Several major newspapers reflect the distorting effects of right-wing owners like Rupert Murdoch (who has succeeded in foisting the execrable Fox News on the United States). And the circulation figures of Britain's dailies show that the size of press runs is inversely proportional to journalistic quality, with the Sun at 3.5 million and the Daily Mail at 2.3 million -- in contrast to two superb dailies, the Guardian (381,000) and the Independent (186,000).
AUSTIN, Texas -- In the "physician, heal thyself" department,
please note the response of White House press spokesman Ari Fleischer to a
bulletin from North Korea that said: "The intention to build up a nuclear
deterrent is not aimed to threaten and blackmail others, but to reduce
conventional weapons. North Korea hopes to channel manpower resources and
funds into economic construction and the betterment of people's living."
Fleischer piously replied: "Perhaps from this glimpse of North Korea acknowledging that its own people suffer as a result of North Korea's policies, it will help North Korea to now make the right decisions. And the right decisions are to put their people first, to feed their people, to get health care to their people ..."
Fleischer piously replied: "Perhaps from this glimpse of North Korea acknowledging that its own people suffer as a result of North Korea's policies, it will help North Korea to now make the right decisions. And the right decisions are to put their people first, to feed their people, to get health care to their people ..."