The Media’s Stunted Perspective
Can't see the forest for the
trees
As happens with most anything even remotely political
these days, the mainstream media gets it and decides to present
a picture that does not represent the actual importance--meaning
news--of the event. In essence, it might be viewed as the liberal
“imprimatur.”
Let’s take Sunday’s NFL playoff championship games
between the Chicago Bears versus the New Orleans Saints, and the
Indianapolis Colts versus the New England Patriots.
Unlike New York Daily News personality/sports writer Mike
Lupica—who fancied himself to be a Bush-basher if only for
a day—I will not be commenting upon something of which I
know little of. (http://www.nydailynews.com/front/story/489487p-412164c.html)
Instead, let’s talk about race and the utter sanctification
that the media-at-large bestows upon it, and its ceaseless attempts
at “colorizing” the news when able.
Both Chicago and Indianapolis won their games. But immediately
after the first paragraph from two separate news stories from
the AP, the usual media-imprimatur took form:
He took Dungy along for the ride, helping his coach finally
get to the big game and make some history along the way. In two
weeks, Dungy will join Chicago 's Lovie Smith in the Super Bowl,
where together they will be the first black head coaches to meet
in the NFL's biggest game. (http://sports.aol.com/nfl/story/_a/manning-leads-comeback-as-colts-stun/20070121223109990001)
Lovie Smith became the first black head coach to reach the
NFL's marquee game in its 41-year history and roughly four hours
later, his good pal and mentor Tony Dungy of the Indianapolis
Colts joined him. (http://sports.aol.com/nfl/story/_a/bears-ride-defense-turnovers-to-super/20070121182909990001)
So what is the hoped-for media perspective here? That two superb
football coaches managed to secure a spot in organized sports
greatest spectacle, the Super Bowl? Or is it the “blacks
advanced another step today in culturally bereft and ever-prejudiced
America by…template the media is looking to forward?
Surely, we have seen this time and again, and some that read
this may be saying, “Hey, so what? We know what the media
is up to, and we don’t buy it.” That’s fine
for most of us, but a good plurality of people don’t get
it, and the plurality I speak of is practically everyone outside
the demographic of white males, ages one to 100. Can anyone give
me a valid reason why it is necessary in this day and age to keep
looking for markers that “anyone but white males”
has crossed over? Does not this type of behavior promote separatism
and race-consciousness?
What’s wrong with just trumpeting the marvelous efforts
by both coaches? Are they not Americans first, and black second?
Why does this concept seem not only foreign to the media, but
to so many of these “minority” groups themselves?
Possibly because the status of the underprivileged or whatever
one chooses to label minority groups, has its advantages—not
the lest of which is an almost supernatural effect on the media
to remind America that everyday in America is still like a day
in Selma, Alabama, circa 1964.
Everyone knows this to be folly, including the mainstream media.
And though there are professional race pimps like Jesse Jackson
and Al Sharpton, that is another story for another day.
It is a stunted and perverse perspective of America that the
liberal media look to promulgate through news story and editorial
alike.And sadly, it seems wholly acceptable to those who are continually
cast as victims in “racist’ America.”
Never mind that blacks in America today dominate the major sports
markets. That is not the point here, nor is it ever--if rarely--discussed.
The point is these two men--Lovie Smith and Tony Dungy--coached
great games. That is the story.
We see this all too often in politics as well. We have seen it
in Iraq now for three plus years, as nothing good can possibly
come out of Baghdad. As the saying goes, “If it bleeds,
it leads.” In Iraq, it was always “If it bled, it
led.”
We see it in the greatest story never told during the Bush Presidency,
the economy. With the exception of energy prices-which are now
receding--and medical care, the economy has flourished under this
Administration.
The housing market seemed to set monthly records, as did the
stock market. Unemployment is at an anemic 4.4 to 4.3%, inflation
is low, and wages have risen about 1.1% in 2006. The federal budget
deficit has been cut in half—a full three years sooner than
Bush had said he would be. (http://www.bizzyblog.com/2006/10/08/the-federal-budget-deficit-mission-accomplished-perhaps-a-lot-more-to-come/)
Inheriting a Clinton-era recession, President Bush accomplished
all of this while navigating scandal-mania via companies like
Enron on Wall Street, 9/11, the war against terrorism, Tsunami
relief, Hurricane Katrina relief, and other little items--like
the largest government entitlement since Lyndon Johnson’s
“Great Society” giveaway, a Medicare drug benefit
that some estimate costing a cool one trillion dollars.
The mainstream media verdict? Bankruptcy lines form to the left,
and soup lines to the right. But thank goodness, we have black
head coaches going to the Super Bowl! And it’s about time!
America is fed a daily bill of goods by its pessimistic and thoroughly
political media. One wonders what the headlines would be if, say,
a Democrat were in the Oval Office?
Why, the cure for cancer—among many other amazing things--would
be just around the corner. All is well. All is well, because the
media says so, but just not now.
|