Do You Want Me to Say What You Want to Hear?

I have a bone to pick with Mark Weisbrot over an opinion piece he wrote titled, Media Has Large, Often Unnoticed Role In National Politics. By first looking at the title, I am sure many of you were thinking the same as me.... "Finally, someone who is going to really put it out there that the media fed to our country who the frontrunners were going to be for the Democratic nominee." He really disappointed me when he compared John Edwards to Barack Obama. He described John as,

"The media can also veto candidates, as in the case of John Edwards. He was not by definition a "marginal" candidate: a U.S. senator and vice-presidential candidate in the last election, at various junctures he polled better against potential Republican contenders than the other Democratic candidates. He led his rivals in introducing a serious health care plan, and arguably transformed the contest in his appeal to the Democratic base on that and other issues.

But the media rejected Edwards, by a combination of ignoring him and subjecting him to much more negative reporting than the other major contenders. The same was true in 2004 for Howard Dean, who rallied the Democratic base but found himself with five or six times as many negative articles in the media than his major democratic primary opponents.

The media does much more than directly influence the opinion of voters. Most donors, politicians, institutions and other important political participants will not waste resources on a candidate that they think is unlikely to win. They often look at how the media treats a candidate in order to make this decision. If the media does not take a candidate seriously or is obviously hostile to him or her, these potential supporters will look elsewhere."

That's not to say that Edwards would have won if the media had not rejected him; most likely he would have lost anyway. But he would have been a more serious contender."
I didn't have a problem with the first part. John did make the Democratic Party this election cycle. He also was leveled with the most criticism because of his more progressive approach to really make change in this country. This is a bad thing apparently? Now listen to what he said about Obama,

"On the other hand, Obama knew how to define his candidacy within the limits of the media's constraints and still have a mass appeal. From the beginning of his campaign he mostly avoided challenging powerful interests, and talked about "getting all sides to the table" and overcoming "decades of bitter partisanship." The media and punditocracy lap this stuff up like honey. At the same time he was able to tap into the voters' deep desire for change, with inspirational speeches, transcendental narratives, and celebrity-studded videos."

Instead of standing up for John and pointing out exactly what was wrong with this election, he later in the article called Obama's campaign style as "genius". This is exactly why so many of us Edward Democrats are still on the fence about who we are or aren't going to vote for in the remaining primaries and caucus' and the general election. Mr. Weisbrot is basically supporting the idea that as long as you say what everyone wants to hear, the media is going to eat up because he can give a good speech. The whole "bring all sides to the table" is.... and I hate to use a Bill Clinton line here.... a fairytale. I don't care if you are Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama.... John Edwards had it right. We need to stop sitting at home on our couches and hoping for change. We need to FIGHT for change. I don't want to HOPE for something to happen because you know what.... I've been hoping for a long time and what has honestly changed THAT much besides things getting worse versus getting better? How many Americans are going hungry every night? How many American soldiers are overseas away from their families? How many Americans don't have health care? And this is what gets praised? The status quo campaign tactics the media has dicated from the beginning? When are people going to stand up for John Edwards, who in my opinion, is still VERY relevant. This is a man who set the Democratic platform. You can call this sour grapes but when articles like this come out it really angers me. I hate to say it but in the end both Clinton and Obama's statements of representation on what John and we stand for will be nothing but empty promises. They will do as Mr. Weisbrot said.... tell us what we want to hear until they are "President of the United States". We cannot become voiceless because all of those people I spoke of are who John and Elizabeth spoke for and continue to speak for. This is why I come back here day after day. I will not let the media run the show. I may be just a small blog on myspace but I hope you, your family, and friends talk about what you read and really have dialogue because I think our fight was Edwards Democrats has just begun. What could be more exciting than that? MY tomorrow begins today!