Astute Reporting on Critical Political News

I have been amused by the media’s reports on Sarah Palin.  They are certainly trying to make something out of nothing, giving her far more media exposure — as well as criticism — than has been afforded other Presidential running mates.

I’m not sure if they have a gender bias, are embarrassed they were caught off guard by her selection, or are merely keeping us “informed” as they get themselves up to speed.

Yesterday, I heard a “man on the street” interview segment, which to be politically correct was a woman on the street piece — why the reporter decided to exclude men was never explained.

I’m not sure what bothered me more, the biased and blatantly uninformed comments of the interviewees or the fact that the reporter actually broadcast their words as informed dialogue.

One woman was condescendingly critical of McCain for making his selection for purely political reasons.  Where has this woman been?  VP running mates are always chosen for political reasons — solely to help the candidate win the election.

Another said she couldn’t support Palin because she couldn’t manage her family (this is, her pregnant daughter), but then admitted that no one can control a 17 year old daughter.  So, “Ms Interviewee” won’t support Sarah, because she can’t do what no one else can do.

Then there are the interviewees gushing with excitement over simply being able to vote for a woman.  Their sole reasoning seems to be that she is female.  Certainly there are other, more important considerations, right?

It seems that journalism is doing quite well at “dumbing” down the political process — and we will all suffer the consequences.

What do you think? Please leave a comment!