After the Midterm Elections: Media Aim for Democrats

By Brigitte L. Nacos
Although the Democrats have not yet taken the reins in the House and Senate, they have already become the new targets in the mass-mediated blame game. Strangely, less than one week after Election Day, the Washington Post’s Howard Kurtz wondered, “Now the question is whether a press corps that has been openly at odds with the president will hold the newly empowered Democrats to the same tough standards…If the Democrats don't pass much legislation, or craft bills that Bush vetoes, will the press blame them for gridlock? If they start rejecting one Bush nominee after another, will the press say they are obstructionist? If, after railing against Republican corruption, they pass only cosmetic ethics reform, will the press say they were all talk and no action?” Were these questions designed to encourage media professionals to be at odds with Democrats as they were with President Bush?

Nothing to worry here: obviously eager to anticipate future failures of the Democrats, the media are already going after the new majority in the congress—especially with respect to the Iraq war. It is impossible to keep track of the many times one reads and hears about the need for Democrats to put forth a plan to deal with the Iraq fiasco—now that they are “empowered” and have the say in the legislature. What a nonsense! President Bush continues to be in charge of foreign and defense policy—particularly since his vice-president has prevailed in exploiting the events of 9/11 to establish an extreme form of the imperial presidency. And when it comes to domestic problems, it seems that the Democrats do have some concrete plans.

Kurtz also wrote that “Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi are enjoying a media honeymoon for the moment -- especially Pelosi, because of her status as the first woman in line to become House speaker and her grandmother-of-five persona. That may not last long. But where will journalists set the performance bar?” The columnist should have waited a day or two to answer his own questions. Pelosi certainly did not enjoy a honeymoon with the press—at best a few days. Nothing could have demonstrated the media’s appetite for controversy, conflict, and intrigue more convincing than their overblown coverage of the competition for the position of majority leader in the House and Pelosi’s failure to shepherd her preferred candidate to victory.  What is wrong with intra-party disagreements? There was not such feeding frenzy about the competition between Republican Senators Trent Lott and Lamar Alexander for minority leader in the Senate and Lott’s victory by just one vote. 

Once the Democrats in Congress are in the saddle, the news media surely should scrutinize what they do and what they fail to do—regardless of the president’s reactions. But blaming Democrats now for not presenting solutions for all pressing problems and especially for not suggesting a new road map for Iraq is premature and unfair for two reasons: (1) the Democrats in Congress have not yet the power to question the witnesses they want to hear from with respect to the Iraq war; and (2) Democratic Senators Joe Biden and Carl Levin have described plans that deserve more serious consideration than people in the White House—and certain media circles—are willing to grant them.

If the media were highlighting the electorate’s dissatisfaction with the all-Republican cast in Washington and the Democrats’ golden opportunity to win the majority in at least one congressional chamber, they surely did not waste any time to make a u-turn and take aim at congressional Democrats.

Comments

[Brigitte]

Jam:
As I told you via e-mail--I deleted your comment yesterday by mistake when, as always, I checked whether a new comment is genuine or a spam.
As you can see from James Fallow's very critical comment some time ago, I do not censor. I will, if inappropriate language is used, and I do,when spams are posted--completely unrelated messages designed to advertise a product or draw attention to a commercial site. That was certainly not true for your comment that took issue with my post and suggested copy-editing improvements on which I have acted and for which I thank you.

[jam]

If your policy is to censor comments, you should so state.

At the very least you could acknowledge my editorial assistance.