I spotted a family, consisting of a man, woman and two young boys (8 - 10 years of age) in the neighborhood the other day. The man was wearing a t-shirt bearing the following note:
"Hit the road Amigo".
While it was tempting to tell him that I had considered wearing my "Elect A Clown Expect A Circus" shirt that day, I instead considered that not only do such antics only serve to exacerbate the current political polarization, but that anyone who considered that clothing item appropriate would most likely not consider physical violence an inappropriate reaction to such a remark.
(from "It's Even Worse Than It Looks; How The American Constitutional System Collided With The New Politics of Extremism" by Thomas E. Mann and Norman J. Ornstein)
". . . Help your readers, listeners, and viewers recognize and understand asymmetric polarization. The [political] Parties are different in many important respects. . . Document those differences, report on them, and consider the implications of those differences for ordinary citizens.
A balanced treatment of an unbalanced phenomenon is a distortion of reality and a disservice to your consumers. . . media should report the truth. Both sides in politics are no more necessarily equally responsible than a hit-and-run driver and a victim; reporters don't treat them as equivalent, and neither should they reflexively treat the parties that way. . . don't seek professional safety through the unfiltered presentation of opposing views. What's the real story? Who's telling the truth? Who is taking hostages at what risks and to what ends?
Fact checks are important contributions to contemporary journalism. What treat them all as equally important and bury them in the back pages? Move them into the body of news stories and onto the lead, and repeat them when politicians continue to repeat falsities despite the fact check.
Stop lending legitimacy to Senate filibusters by treating a sixty-vote hurdle as routine. The framers certainly didn't intend that. Your consumers should be better informed of the costs associated with it. Report individual senators' abusive use of holds and clearly identify every time a minority party uses a filibuster to kill a bill or nomination with majority support. Do not say or write that Congress of the Senate killed a bill or stopped a nomination if a majority in both houses voted for the bill or the individual-say or write the truth, that the bill or person was blocked despite majority support, by the use of a filibuster. This is especially true, as with the example of the DISCLOSE Act on campaign finance, when all the members of one party (in that case, fifty-nine) support a bill and all the members of the minority vote against. It was not Congress that blocked disclosure-it was one political party via the filibuster.
Your highest priority should be to clarify the choices voters face and the likely consequences of those choices after the election. How would they govern? What could they accomplish? What differences can people expect from a unified Republican or Democratic government or one divided between the parties? The "how would they govern?" story is always important, but more so now than ever. . . "
What
do YOU think?
http://www.rayjozwiak.com/guestbook.html
You can NOW download
your
very own copy of Ray Jozwiak's
newest release:
AMBIENCE & WINE
Romney's misrepresenting Obama's welfare plan. The need for fact-checkers. Serious and terminal illness, helplessness and grief. Willful ignorance. Political polarization. The approaching end of summer. Droning, monotone, musically elementary folk singers who are hugely popular. Office politics. Lack of leadership. Bad poetry. Higher prices. Senseless killing. Theistic religions with archaic tenets. Endless, mindless drivel from the media about stupid people who have money but no sense.
What
do YOU think?
http://www.rayjozwiak.com/guestbook.html
You can NOW download
your
very own copy of Ray Jozwiak's
newest release:
AMBIENCE & WINE
