Recent commentary from National Journal:
Social Studies: Can the Death Penalty Be Saved From Its Supporters?, by Jonathan Rauch (July 11, 2000)
The people who stand to gain the most from doubt-reducing steps are the proponents of capital punishment.
Legal Affairs: How the 'Conservative' Supreme Court Leans to the Liberal Side, by Stuart Taylor Jr. (July 11, 2000)
The justices should not consult public opinion before dealing with hot issues.
Political Pulse: The Court Still Amazes and Outrages, by William Schneider (July 11, 2000)
Late June's flood of Supreme Court rulings left conservatives churlish.
Legal Affairs: Oops -- There's Much, Much More Gore And Reno, by Stuart Taylor Jr. (July 6, 2000)
Gore's April 18 testimony illustrates how slippery and disingenuous (if not perjurious) he can be even when under oath.
Media: Swing Low, Sweet Press Corps, by William Powers (July 6, 2000)
Flashback candidate Ralph Nader calls Gore and Bush "the drab" and "the dreary." The depressing thing is, he's right.
Political Pulse: Drilling for Blame, by William Schneider (Junly 6, 2000)
Many voters are suspicious about the causes of soaring gasoline prices. And with good reason.
More from National Journal.
Discuss this article in the Politics & Society conference of Post & Riposte.
Media:Anyone But Us
This election year, let's not just choose a new President. Let's elect a new media. After all, the incumbent media, the liberal one, is terribly unpopular. Its poll numbers are pitiful. It's not accurately reflecting the views of the American people.
As the editor in chief of this magazine, Michael Kelly, noted in his Washington Post column, the liberal media just pulled another fast one. We turned the death penalty into a big campaign issue, though by all rights it shouldn't be. George W. Bush and Al Gore support capital punishment, a majority of citizens agree with them, and few voters rate it a critical question. It became one only because we liberal media goo-goos don't like the death penalty, not one bit.
Kelly's right, of course. On issue after issue, the people lean one way, and we lean the other. From school prayer to taxes, from abortion to missile defense, from gay marriage to foreign aid, we have utterly different views from the public we serve. They say yes, and we say no. They say stop, and we say go, go, go. When the public yells "Jump," we never even think about asking, "How high?" We turn our haughty backs on them, sniffing at their dumb, ill-conceived notions, their vulgar little ideas about how to run a society. Who are they to tell us what to do?
The journalistic establishment is like one big, pretentious snot-nosed French waiter, and it's time for America to hurl a glass of ice water in its face and give it the boot. Time to elect a new media!
But what kind of media should we elect? There are several promising candidates. Let's see how they stack up.
1. The Conservative Media. Electing this candidate would be reminiscent of the presidential election of 1980, in which Ronald Reagan replaced the liberal Jimmy Carter. It would be morning in the media. The New York Times would fire Editorial Page Editor Howell Raines, that unabashed liberal, and replace him with Arianna Huffington, who would immediately dump Maureen Dowd and bring in Kate O'Beirne. Dan Rather would disappear from the CBS anchor desk, and all his weirdo Texas-liberal, Hillary-loving biases would go with him. Rush Limbaugh would take Rather's place, and Tom DeLay would suddenly be the subject of slyly flattering, endlessly slanted coverage. At the White House Correspondents' Dinner, media bigs would compete furiously to get the most sought-after celebrity guest -- the glamorous Charlton Heston -- to sit at their tables. PBS would cut all ties with Bill Moyers and announce an exciting new series on American culture, hosted by Robert Bork. Matt Drudge would replace David Remnick. At Washington dinner parties, pretentious references to "the Sidwell parents' association" would be replaced by pretentious references to "Gary Bauer's fabulous new charter school." If the mainstream media now roughly mirrors the views of the Upper West Side of Manhattan (and it does), in this bold new era it would roughly mirror the views of the upper west side of Idaho.
2. The Middling Media. This is the candidate of the Gore-Bush party. On all issues, it splits the difference and lands precisely in the center. This media has no personal convictions, because convictions are eccentric and undemocratic (i.e., they do not reflect the polls). The Middling Media has positions, however, and they are all carefully shaped and molded, hedged and clipped to mirror the public's views at any given moment. Thus, it will be for the death penalty as long as at least 50.0001 percent of the people are for the death penalty. And when that number drops to 49.9999 percent, it will cautiously reassess. There is one position on which this media will not waver, however, no matter how much pressure is brought to bear. It is firmly in favor of the American family, and its coverage will always unwaveringly reflect that position. If this media is elected, all American newspapers, magazines, and TV news outlets will be abolished, except one: USA Today.
3. The Transparent Media. This third-party candidate is a newcomer to the scene, an intriguing upstart with a strong grass-roots following among younger voters. This media has no positions at all. It doesn't need to watch the polls because it is itself a kind of poll. It simply asks the people for their views of current events and transmits those views unfiltered right back to the people, who much prefer their own views over anyone else's. This media contender, which is run mostly by machines and is therefore cost-efficient, will set up a new Web site where the people can make themselves heard on the issues of the day. It will ask one and only one question -- "What do you think?" -- and the people will vote by clicking their selection, AOL-style. The results will be instantly tabulated and reported to senior public officials. This media also promises to place a webcam in every American home, so that all the people can appear simultaneously on streaming video and define the content of the news, by being the content of the news. Next to the Transparent Media, C-SPAN is shockingly, dangerously biased.
There you have it. Imagine, one of the above will be our next all-powerful media. Oh, there's another candidate in the race, too. The Liberal Media, desperate to hold on to power, is running for re-election. But our numbers continue to plunge, and, given the marvelous alternatives, it seems unlikely America would want to keep the deeply flawed media it's got.
What do you think? Discuss this article in the Politics & Society conference of Post & Riposte.
More from National Journal.
More on politics and society in Atlantic Unbound and The Atlantic Monthly.
William Powers is media columnist for National Journal. He recently spent three months in Japan as a Japan Society Fellow, studying the role of reading in Japanese life. This column appears every week in National Journal, a weekly magazine covering politics and government published in Washington, D.C.
For information on National Journal Group publications, see NationalJournal.com.
All material copyright © 2000 by The Atlantic Monthly Group. All rights reserved.
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |