Obama can't relax and enjoy his lead in the polls.

Obama can't relax and enjoy his lead in the polls.

According to a Real Clear Politics poll, which is an average of all the major polls, Barack Obama is beating John McCain 48.9 percent to 43.8 percent among likely voters. Not bad for the Obama camp, considering the race was a dead heat a few weeks ago. The analysis of the debate went almost unanimously to Obama, but I see clouds on the horizon for “that one.” Two important factors still stand in the way of Obama’s road to the presidency, and unless he expands his lead even further before November 4, the word “hope” may take on a more traditional meaning in his campaign.

First, there is the as yet unseen, but nearly undeniable, effect of race on this election. Anyone who lives in the Midwest will tell you that people are a lot more racist when they think nobody is looking. You know your crazy uncle who is perfectly congenial until he has a few drinks at the family reunion? The one who inevitably starts speaking his mind about politics and society and the welfare state because “fuck it, we’re all family!” Everyone has that uncle -- everyone. Still don’t believe race is going to be an issue? Check this recent study done by Associated Press and Yahoo News or this study by Stanford. This sort of racial divide is sad, and at this point in the campaign, downright ridiculous, but it exists. The facts are there. Unless there is a sudden paradigm shift in the minds of the Americans who are uncomfortable with a black man in the Oval Office, Obama is in a tighter race than his supporters would like to admit. The saddest part is that he has not run his campaign along racial lines at all. It is clear that Barack Obama did not believe he would be judged solely by the content of his character, though in the eyes of many voters he was and will be, which is why he has been so careful to appear calm and collected. He knows that just one slip-up could brand him with the repulsive "angry black man" stereotype. He has meticulously avoided being characterized along racial lines. Unfortunately the statistics don't lie: that will not be enough to sway some Americans, and everyone gets a vote -- for better or worse.

The other problem Obama will have to come to terms with is the schizoid attention span of American mass media. As bad as it is, the economy won’t dominate the news cycle (read public consciousness) forever. Eventually O’Reilly, Beck and Matthews will find “new” things to yell about, and the media will move on. Because illegal immigration is slipping, it will probably be either Pakistan or Distinguished Professor/Former Domestic Terrorist William Ayers. Both options offer plenty to yell and bluster about, and they are relatively recent events in the news cycle. It’s hard to tell if the Ayers story is dying out or just now picking up steam, but after having so many of his “friends” called into question, you'd think Obama would set his Facebook page to private.

Regardless, he cannot allow his lead to narrow any further, and anything that shifts the public's attention away from the economy is bad for him. The Obama campaign obviously realizes the danger of letting John McCain say Obama associates with terrorists, so a few hours ago the Illinois senator made a ballsy (albeit a bit childish) challenge to McCain. At this point I would not be surprised to turn on C-SPAN and see a big circle of senators in the hallway of the Capitol chanting, “Fight! Fight! Fight!” For the first time since 1856, the British Parliament will hear the American news and think our legislators are being uncivil.

All jokes about the petty, floundering state of American democracy aside, the Obama campaign should be wary of breaking out the champagne any time soon. There is still nearly a month to go until the election, and things seem to be getting more ridiculous by the day. One thing is for certain: the combination of one of the most negative campaign seasons of all time and a president with approval ratings as low as post-Watergate Nixon means the real winner when this near-farcical election is over will be America.

"Pirates Party, Shoot Each Other"

This isn’t the plot of the latest Johnny Depp flick. No, it is something a bit more cuckoo than old Jack Sparrow. The title of this post, "Pirates Party, Shoot Each Other" is the exact title of the link on Fox News' homepage (pictured in the screenshot above). Never mind the fact that the link in question transports readers to the much more ambiguous story, with a much more ambiguous headline, of shots fired in the night that Fox actually reported. Never mind that any reports of deaths are currently unconfirmed, a point made even by the anonymous U.S. government official who claimed the pirates shot three of their own. Never mind the fact that the pirates themselves said the shots were fired to celebrate the Islamic holiday of Eid, which marks the end of Ramadaan.

The front page title remains: "Pirates Party, Shoot Each Other."

It isn't uncommon or surprising for Fox, or any other cog in the 24 hour mega-news machine, to distort the facts of a story so that they make for "better" news. However, it is much less common to find an example as blatant as this one, wherein the story's front-page link has a title which is called into question immediately upon reading the story. I am not saying that I think the pirates definitely did not shoot each other, but the facts of this story show that it is at unclear whether they did or did not. One thing is clear however, this story is presented in a way that makes factually unsubstantiated assumptions about what happened.

The unethical treatment of this story is not limited to the title it was given on Fox's homepage. While the anonymous government official is quoted in the lede of the story, the pirates are not quoted until the fifth graf. So not only did Fox decide that the statement of a government source was significantly more important than the contrary, and first hand, account of the pirates, they gave primacy to an anonymous source over a verifiable source. The link's title also misleads the target audience through the word "party." The use of pirates on party in the same sentence instantly conjures images of rum soaked debauchery and violence, but Eid is a religious holiday and drinking alcohol in excess is forbidden in many interpretations of the Koran.

It may seem excessive to harp on the minutia of this story, but these issues represent a widespread, and dangerous, trend in news media. Fox has to compete nationally with other news outlets, all of which are running the exact same stories. The only way for Fox, or any other 24 hour news operation, to compete is to amp up the drama. Consumers are more drawn to a story with a body count, so that is what Fox offered up in the link's title. It is a shame that journalism is no longer about reporting the truth exclusively and unconditionally. It seems that in 2008 if it isn't sexy -- it isn't news. Today's most popular journalists seem uninterested in dealing with the blatant erosion of journalism's core principles, so I hope the next generation, my generation, of journalists is more concerned with the ethical implications of their work. Otherwise, it seems I am going to have to change my major to creative writing if I want to get a job as a journalist.

Stories with Holes

In the last several days, the Wall Street financial crisis has gone from bad to worse, and it has become apparent that economic interests must start to take precedence over the state of the election polls.

Both the Bush administration and the presidential hopefuls sort through numbers and talk about borrowing foreign dollars, but what no one talks about or attempts to explain is the true effect that the economy crisis will have on the average American. Rather than stating solid facts, they rely on predictable, age-old statements. The Democrats criticize the Republicans for borrowing a quick fix, claiming that the Democratic party would rather fold in on itself than raise the taxes of the individuals. The Republicans criticize the Democrats for not discussing and sticking to a clear economical plan. 

According to cnn.com, McCain announced today that he is taking a break from the campaign trail in an effort to aid in economic relief efforts. However, the story, as well as the site in general, lacks specific details about the possible consequences of the situation. Our media devotes a great deal space to pondering the sexual orientations of our celebrities, yet invests no visible time or space to explaining the complicated entanglement of our country's financial problems to the less-invested, "average" citizen.

The media has failed in its comprehensive coverage of the country's current financial situation. Until Americans are given a clearer picture of U.S. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson's 700 billion dollar bailout plan, until the plummet of the value of the dollar is explained in more detail, and until the ordinary citizen is given more information about how these economic recovery strategies will affect their taxes, travel plans, and everyday life, the "average American" will remain just that: an uninformed citizen who is ill prepared to make a decision in November.

Tasteless Bull Crap Featuring "Black John McCain"

If you ever wondered whether television makes you dumber, this clip from CNN should answer that question unequivocally.

So here is the premise, the African American man who was the drummer in The Toasters is named John McCain. "Who cares?" you may be saying to yourself, but here is the kicker -- he is voting for Barack Obama!

The drama and newsworthiness is almost overwhelming. It was so relevant and insightful that CNN.com even linked it above the metaphorical fold on their front page.

I think the worst part about this piece is that it actually glosses over a real story about a news anchor in Maine who is being harassed by viewers because she looks too much like Sarah Palin. Though this is only slightly worse than when the reporter tries to get "Black John McCain" to put on a mask of White John McCain. He refuses, obviously, so she puts it on herself and gawks at the camera like a big-headed wrinkly ghost made of latex condoms. Note: this isn't a comment about how John McCain looks; it is a comment on how his hollow rubber effigy looks on a newswoman.

I'm not sure yet whether this is most offensive to me as a journalist, an American or a human being, maybe I'll update this post when I do decide. On the other hand, I can actually feel myself getting dumber with every second that I waste thinking about it -- so maybe I'll just let it die.

The Man Destined to Fail

Up until this point all of my posts have been tied directly to a specific news article or event; I feel that it is now time for a change of pace.

With the presidential election just over a month away, both candidates have ramped up the efforts of their private muckrakers and begun saturating the airwaves with an unprecedented amount of advertising. This, combined with he recent string of life altering events on the national stage (the credit crisis, hurricane Ike, renewed violence in Afghanistan), has led me to form a hypothesis:

The next President will be inevitably be, at best, a disappointment. They will go down in history like Jimmy Carter or Lyndon Johnson; their terms in office will be marked by comments about difficult and ultimately unsuccessful battles against nigh unsolvable problems. At worst, and this seems increasingly likely given the recent unscrupulous ads put out by the McCain campaign, they will be framed as total failures and four years from now Americans will vote for a get-the-job-done-no-matter-what-the-cost politician(see Nixon, Tyler).

Part of the reason I think this is an increasingly likely scenario is the unnaturally high expectations that voters have for their candidates this election cycle. Americans have put the next president in a position where he'll have to solve several problems, which have been stewing for nearly a decade, in just four years. The chance of success is very slim and the the margin for error is even slimmer. However, the primary reason for my prediction involves the death, in the media and in the perception of Americans, of truth. The media and politicians constantly bombard the American public with contradictory claims about the issues of this election. For example, if I ask a conservative pundit about Sarah Palin's involvement in the dubious "Bridge to Nowhere" I will likely hear that she stopped it. However if I ask a liberal pundit, I am likely to hear that not only did Palin not stop the project, she was complicit in it. What is more, both of these pundits would present their views on the issue as facts. Thus, the audience members of these pundits will be at an impasse if they try to have a dialog about Palin with a person from the opposing party. Both people will believe they have irrefutable evidence that they are correct. This sort of situation arises constantly in today's media saturated society and it has led to a situation in which the truth is simply what people choose to believe. Because of this the next president will seem to be a savior to the Americans who voted for him, and a grave mistake to those who didn't.
Every decision he makes will be followed by a flurry of propaganda from the opposition, and another "factual" impasse will be created.

I don't think this will be the end of the American Experiment, new web 2.0 technologies seem to be a budding solution to this problem, but I would be very surprised if the next few presidents ever have an approval rating that tops 55%.

Early Birds Not Leaving Much Time

Within the last few elections, campaigns have seen a number of changes. The rise of the internet and faster communication devices has made tracking the polls easier than it has ever been. Candidates have been able to transmit their respective platforms and views across a wider range of voters in a quicker time period. There are now many more ways to cast one's vote than waiting in line at the polling place on the day of the election. However, with diversified voting methods come newfound challenges for the campaigns.

According to Time.com, yesterday was the first day that Virginia voters can cast their ballots at early polling sites located around the state. They will not be alone; between now and the election all but 14 of the 50 states will allow early voting at specialized voting places. In addition, any registered voter can cast their ballot absentee, as long as they complete the proper paperwork. Convenient as this may be for college students and those voters unable to avoid work on November 4, increasing leniency on election regulations puts a crunch on the usually crucial last month of campaigning. 

61% of eligible Americans voted in the 2004 election, according to thewashintonpost.com. While this was the highest voter turnout that the country has seen since 1968, that still leaves out two-fifths of the population. With hopes of stimulating interest and activity at the polling booth, states have made the registration process almost effortless, most notably by no longer pinning down an absolute election day.

Because of the time discrepancy caused by the 47 day polling window, the 2008 election will leave something to be desired in terms of accuracy. In a political climate where sensationalistic attack ads can change the course of a campaign in a matter of hours, September's hot topics will no longer be November's news. The voters that show up at the polls on "election day," will perhaps be making their decision based on different information.

After an especially long and arduous primary season that posed the same questions in regards to timing and accuracy, it's clear that no one has learned the lesson.

Fiorina calls SNL impersonation of Palin 'sexist'

Carly Fiorina, a spokesperson for John McCain's presidential campaign, told MSNBC that she felt Tina Fey's portrayal of Alaskan Governor Sarah Palin on Saturday Night Live was "sexist."

Without even delving into the fact that Tina Fey is widely suspected to be a major supporter of Senator Hilary Clinton, played on SNL by Amy Poehler, the entire purpose of the sketch was to point out that attacking Palin's credentials is not sexist. It is in fact a reasonable thing for citizens to do, and a responsibility for the media. The only joke that even bordered on sexist was a crack about Palin's "Tina Fey glasses," which was clearly a joke aimed at the striking resemblance between Fey and Palin. Palin herself has made mention of her resemblance to Fey.

However, all of this is secondary to the fact that Saturday Night Live has run some of the most glass-ceiling-shattering sketches in its history this year. First there was the classic sketch in which Clinton debates Senator Barack Obama (NBC does not currently have this sketch available online). The moderator grills Clinton and then asks Obama, "Can we get you anything?" Then Tina Fey made a triumphant return to SNL's Weekend Update with the famous/infamous "bitch is the new black" segment. Fey rips the mainstream media a new one over what she saw as the sexist mistreatment of Hilary Clinton's campaign.

Fey has risen to the top of a field which is dominated by men, and she has done it in an uncompromising way, because she is one of the most talented comic writers in television. If Tina Fey has it in for Sarah Palin it certainly isn't because Fey is sexist. Just the opposite, Fey's point is that an inexperienced and seemingly unqualified woman being tapped for the Vice Presidency is as sexist as a qualified woman being denied the position.

Gender reconciliation, like racial reconciliation, is not a competition in which certain benchmarks must be met at all costs. It is a march towards equality, and the means are as important as the ends. If Sarah Palin becomes Vice President, it will not make life any easier for Jane Doe who makes 30% less money than her male co-workers. The inauguration of a female VP is just an arbitrary benchmark unless it is perceived that the woman in question earned the position.

The SNL sketch in question is a nuanced criticism of the media, and its fear of being perceived as sexist, and the McCain camp, which seems to believe that American women cannot see the differences between Palin and Clinton.