Obama's victory on November 4th begot much jubliation across the country. The election was a cathartic event finalizing the demise of the Bush administration. Voters seemed to have made a wise decision. Obama's charm and attraction added to the momentum. No doubt, the Obama campaign ran smartly and effectively through the election season, beginning 2 years ago.Readers, listners or watchers of media would not have guessed the election to be a blow out in favor of Obama. The media consistently gave the impression that the election could have gone either way. Certainly the media heightened the anticipation of the election in their zeal for viewer/readership. With great anticipation will come great expectation for an Obama presidency. For Obama's constituency that will mean holding Obama and his administration to his campaign promises.
If media coverage is any indication of how well voters are informed and can hold the president elect to his words, the election amounted to a shallow popularity contest . Clark Hoyt, the public editor of the New York Times found in an October 12th report that roughly 10% of media coverage discussed the policy of the two presidential candidates. The other 90% focused on the horse race, character assessments (is McCain too old, is Obama too arogant, etc) or how well the campaigns are performing.
The post-election coverage does not seem to stray from this line of discussion. Especially in the case of the latter days of the Bush administration, media coverage has not questioned Bush's impending regulations and pardons. More importantly the media has had more interest in Bush's reaction to the election of Barak Obama and his assurances that the lame duck president will fully cooperate with the president elect, as if he had a choice.
Even more disappointing is the post election coverage of Obama, even though in Hoyt's report, the Times suggests the paper could have done a better job with policy coverage. The media largely focuses on what kind of dog Obama will purchase for his daughters, Mrs. Obama's dress worn during Mr. Obama's victory speech. Once again the media continues to miss the opportunity to scrutinize Obama's policies and analyse their possible consequences.
Barber shop conversations are more revealing as the same headlines are repeated in work places or community gathering points as if human interest headlines reflect on Obama's more important stances, like the economy or the war in Iraq (the president elect does not suggest we pull out completely).
Headlines are a great way to sell news but voters need to look beyond the headlines and ask questions of reporting and of each other. A better approach to political discourse would be to demand that media outlets emphasize policy issues, as suggested in Hoyt's report, in which case a true public discourse and debate can take place. Even better, people can look at official sources for information either about a candidates policy vision or Bush's current executive orders. The debate can be taken to a higher level at the barber shop level if people are better informed.
