The Palin Effect and the Death of Political Journalism

Palin, Paul, and Angle tactics and disappearing media add up to bad news for democracy

July 14, 2010 RSS Feed Print

Sarah Palin is living the dream. Since the dawn of time, or at least since the 1960s, politicians from both parties, though conservatives in particular, have yearned to block out the press. They have pined for a way to commune with their voters without the pesky media distorting their message.

Now, a couple of incipient trends are increasingly making it possible. On one hand, the reportorial ranks have been decimated, leading some to fear the end of that journalistic species known as the local political reporter. On the other hand, pols have a host of new ways to reach voters. Here, Palin is blazing a trail which some high profile GOP-ers are starting to follow.

To the extent that these two factors grow and feed off of each other, it will be bad for American politics.

Since her sudden departure from office, the former half-term governor of Alaska has managed a political feat that is audacious and a bit startling. She has maintained her role as a national figure without ever dealing with the press. Instead, she has issued a steady stream of pronouncements through Facebook and Twitter—where she'll never have to weather gotcha questions like "What newspapers do you read?"—while also appearing on friendly broadcast outlets.

[Check out our editorial cartoons on Sarah Palin.]

Practically the only time she addresses reporters is when she denounces them as the "lamestream media," often from her regular perch on Fox News. (With the 13 most-watched cable news programs, Fox is by any measure, and especially by a Palin-esque, market-driven one, the definition­ of mainstream media. So what does she mean by "lamestream media"? Oh wait, I've just answered my own question.)

Palin is of course not unique in embracing new media. Obama campaign-produced videos were viewed over one billion times during the 2008 presidential campaign according to Tom Rosenstiel, director of the Pew Research Center's Project for Excellence in Journalism. That's more eyes watching Obama on YouTube, Rosenstiel suggests, than saw him on network nightly news reports.

But new and alternative media have been a component of a media strategy, not its totality. With the press transcribing Palin's tweets as if they were serious policy statements, why should she ever go back? And other candidates are starting to take Palin's cues.

Kentucky GOP Senate nominee Rand Paul went to ground after making his national debut by questioning elements of the Civil Rights Act. "Where in the world is Rand Paul?" one AP article asked in early June. When a local TV reporter tried to ask Paul about Medicaid reimbursement, the would-be senator said he would be "more than happy to answer any questions about our campaign activities, and running for office," but not policy ones. If the reporter wanted to submit a question in writing, the campaign would look at it, Paul said. Apparently, Paul has decided not to get lured into the trap of saying what policies he would support if elected.

Nevada Republican Senate nominee Sharron Angle was literally chased through a parking lot last month by a reporter asking what she had meant when she said "Second Amendment remedies" might be needed if Congress doesn't shape up. "Where In The World Is Sharron Angle?" (notice a theme?) a local Fox station headlined one mid-June story. And she demonstrated the wisdom of the Palin approach at the end of June when she broke down and chatted with veteran Nevada reporter Jon Ralston. Judging by what she said, silence really was the better part of campaigning. "There are jobs" in Nevada, she said, but people are refusing them because of the cushy lifestyle afforded by unemployment benefits. For those keeping score at home, Nevada's unemployment rate is 14 percent, the highest in the nation.

That Paul and Angle were being pursued by intrepid local reporters could almost be a story in and of itself. Veteran national political reporter Walter Shapiro has noticed a dearth of local reporters following candidates. "What we are witnessing in this election cycle is the slow death of traditional statewide campaign journalism," he wrote on the website Politics Daily.

Tags:
Rand Paul,
Sharron Angle,
Barack Obama,
Congress,
Scott Brown,
Twitter,
journalism,
Sarah Palin,
Facebook

Reader Comments Read all comments (35)

Add Your Thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

Unbiased? No axes to grind? No opinion? Perhaps just an inability to dig for facts when Robert Gibbs feeds them kibbles and bits, Palin is asked about her shoes and not how she would solve problems, or the President is asked about what he puts on hot dogs. Oh, I see, the phonies from the papers all think they are writing for the feature page?

This piece reminds me of Evan Thomas' piece in Newsweek on March 1, 2008, when which he asked, "Is the mainstream press unbiased? No, but we aren't ideological. What we really thrive on is conflict." Sounds like the old KGO radio, doesn't it?

Now Schlesinger bemoans the fact that he and his colleagues have made themselves less indespensable than they thought they were. And is he surprised? I am not.

When Hearst and his pals controlled the papers perhaps they had one thing in mind: making money. The publishers today ought to be thinking of the same thing instead of cozying up to the pols. If the Atlanta Journal-Constitution (my hometown paper that used to be more than a birdcage floor) has "improved" it has done so at the expense of creative writing. There are a few good folk left, but the "rip and read" syndicated pap found there is not worth much. And the beleagured NYT and WaPo and the rest have only themselves to blame: they cannot keep hard news and opinion separated. But...

when was the so-called "golden age" when newspapers had integrity? And the teevee and radio had integrity? [Although I was a Huntley-Brinkley and Cronkite aficiando, along with Nessen and others, because I believed them to have scruples and some sense of humor...]

velville of sandy springs of GA 4:38PM July 30, 2010

This column, including its huge swath of political bias, comes about five years too late. The decline of old media has been reported on, by others obviously, for over a decade. Newspapers have been dying since the late 60's.

In spite of the whiny tone of this article about the decline of the "top-down" we're-smarter-than-you so read and believe us old media, there is plenty of good and great reporting out there--in fact, because of the ease of publishing, the rise of the Internet, the rise of Fox News, CNBC, MSNBC, Comedy Central and other cable outlets, an increasingly vital and responsible blogosphere, it's impossible for anyone to get away with anything. This simplistic reporter already reported on Sharon Angle, Sarah Palin, and Paul Rand trying to get away with stuff--and others from the other side have cornered Sen. John Kerry trying to get away from paying $437,000 in taxes in Massachusetts, the state he supposedly represents, on his new $7 million yacht berthed in Rhode Island. The end result--Kerry will pony up the taxes. We've also managed, after a lot of political pressure--especially from the new media--to corner Charlie Rangal, so maybe he, too, will pay his taxes. But I digress...

The point is that there is plenty of reporting and plenty of information. What we won't miss are articles like this from people like this who want people to only think the way that they do--and who used to work at one of the few media outlets that people had access too. Now, with new media, we have plenty of choice of what to watch and who to read and listen to.

As government is trying to narrow our choices, technology is widening our choices of media. So watch carefully--and we can already see it with proposed "campaign finance rules" (rules to stifle speech from unfavored parties)--there will be an attack on the First Amendment. If that is successful, we're all in real trouble.

SherlockHolmes of NH 10:59AM July 28, 2010

he said if my people who are called by my name (christian) would humble themselves and turn from their wicked way and seek my face. then would i hear from heaven and heal their land.remeber the order of things in God...God the farther,God the son(jesus) and God the holy spirit...then man woman and children..that is the order..God the son Jesus said the only way to the father God is thru him..he said if you come any other way..you come as a thief and robber..he said in revelation he was going to take them....the devil,death, hell and the grave also liers and throw them in that lake of fire and brim stone..which is the second death for ever seperated from God...

hgivens of GA 6:20PM July 27, 2010

advertisement

Debate Club

Was 2011 One of the Worst Years for the U.S. Government in American History?

Experts debate where 2011 ranks among Washington's worst years.

Latest Video

Thomas Jefferson Street Blog

Obama Flops Against 'Uncommitted' in Arkansas, Kentucky Primaries

Obama stands to lose voters in Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Virginia due to his coal regulations.

Mitt Romney Brought Bain Capital Criticisms on Himself

Romney might be a fixer, but he isn't a job creator.

Mitt Romney's Bain History Deserves Scrutiny

Voters deserve to know about Romney's work history before they hire him for the job as president.

Mitt Romney Can’t Afford to Lose Obama's Bain Game

Romney needs to showcase the jobs he created at Bain and why Obama can't fix the economy.

Rutgers Bullying Case About Gay Rights, Privacy

The Ravi-Clementi case raises the deeper issues equal rights for gays and the right to privacy.

The House of Representatives Is the Scariest Circus on Earth

There's a new circus in town, and it's called the House of Representatives.

Obama Discovers Lobbyists Are Hard to Get Rid Of

Lobbying is a constitutionally protected activity and lobbyists have become a permanent part of the Washington policy process.

Obama Catholic Contraception Fight Isn't Over As Church Sues

The "evolution" in Obama's thinking on the issue of religious freedom is disappointing.

advertisement