Two Day Magazine

Stop the insanity!

The 2008 presidential election was touted as an especially historic event.  In the beginning of the race to the White House, the group of candidates was large and diverse, at least in terms of their stances on prominent issues.  Now, the field of candidates has narrowed and the distinguishing characteristic of each remaining democratic candidate is either race or gender.  In general, the attention that the mainstream media has given to all of the candidates has been unequal and fraught with bias.  Currently in the election cycle, one detail is very clear: that the media coverage of identity politics has taken precedence over the coverage of crucial issues.

Identity Politics

The diversity of the remaining candidates is the focal point of much of the mainstream media.  When the South Carolina primaries were held on January 26, CNN sent reporters to this southern state to talk to a pivotal group of voters: Democratic African American women.  The reporters canvassed restaurants and beauty parlors in hopes of hearing the genuine voices of this critical group of voters.  But, the issue that the reporters were hammering home was not the economy or the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.  Rather, each woman was asked, “What is more important to consider as you vote, the fact that you are black or the fact that you are a woman?”  The majority of women responded that they would be voting for Barack Obama, not because of his race, but because they thought he would be a greater change agent than Hillary Clinton.

Fair enough.  Many have expressed concern over the fact that if Senator Clinton were to be elected that our country would be voting for another dynasty. However, the reporters who asked this question were assuming that the women in question were making decisions based upon their race and gender.  Furthermore, the media in situation was defining the democratic candidates not by their qualifications, but by their prospective race and gender.  More recently, former democratic Vice Presidential candidate Geraldine Ferraro, told the Torrance California Daily Breeze that, "If Barack Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position. And, if he was a woman (of any color) he would not be in this position.”  She later added that Senator Obama was reaping the benefits of “a very sexist media” because the media has been especially hard on Senator Clinton.  Although Ferraro’s comments can be viewed as being inappropriate and unfair, they do bring to light the fact that much of the news that has emerged from the democratic side of the race has involved race or gender.  The real reasons that these candidates should even be considered as President are being pushed aside, so that the media can cover the politics of identity.

Media Coverage

On the republican side of the race, it would appear that John McCain is the only candidate running.  In reality, Ron Paul is still technically in the race for the presidency, but the mainstream media refuses to provide his campaign with any coverage.  In the realm of third parties, Ralph Nader is attempting his fifth run for the White House, an event that has received little to no response from the media.  What is being covered by the mainstream media?  At the moment, remarks make by Senator Obama’s pastor concerning 9/11 and racial relations and inequalities are circulating the major news outlets.  And in recent weeks, Senator Obama’s voluntary foreign policy advisor Samantha Power had to resign because she called Senator Clinton a “monster.”  In these instances, we can see that the media is again pandering to the politics of identity.   There are probably a variety of reasons that the media feels prompted to cover the differences and tensions between the Clinton and Obama campaigns.  It is, after all, election season, and drama earns ratings.  How can we expect fair and unbiased news reporting when they are fighting for people to tune in?

What is wrong with that?  In a simple answer, nothing is wrong with the media outlets competing for viewers.  This is, after all, a free country.  But, by playing the game of identity politics, the media is preventing the election from being free, democratic, and fair.  Instead of bring together potential voters by providing information about education, healthcare, environment, and other issues that could potentially unite this country and make it stronger, the media is perpetuating stereotypes and forcing people to judge candidates based on traits that they can’t control, like age, race, or gender.  Instead of promoting free elections, the media is controlling coverage so that differences are highlighted between candidates, and ultimately, between the American people.