NEW YORK, Aug. 11, 2008
Obama's No. 1 Media Problem
MarketWatch Media Columnist Jon Friedman Says Democrat Better Get Used To Probing, Critical Coverage
-
Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., arrives at the Valley of the Temples memorial park, which features the replica of a 12th century Buddhist temple named Byodo-In Temple, near Kaneohe, Hawaii, Aug. 10, 2008. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)
-
Photo Essay Barack Obama A look at the life and meteoric rise of the president-elect.
-
Photo Essay Barack Backers Millions raised at celebrity-packed fundraiser in L.A.
I'm starting to worry about Barack Obama.
From a journalistic perspective, he seemed like such a refreshing departure from the oft-paranoid media relations practiced by Bill and Hillary Clinton and the two George Bushes.
Now I'm not so sure.
Too often, Obama and his handlers have overreacted to what we've come to accept as frivolous, basically harmless "coverage" by the celebrity-obsessed mainstream media.
Two examples of him getting his back up: Obama made a federal case of the appearance by his daughters on "Access Hollywood" and he was snippy with reporters when he was pressed about his unexpected email friendship with actress Scarlett Johansson.
Sure, these are minor events. But if he is going to be anal about the small stuff, it may get ugly if he loses his composure about something important.
Obama has staked his claim by offering American voters a fresh voice and a strong sense of optimism about the future. When he was on the way up, he was the favorite son of the media, who heaped almost unprecedented praise on him. Now that he has all but secured the Democratic nomination, Obama has shown little patience for standard media practices, which can range from silly to stupid.
The Obama team may still think the "old" rules apply. By old, I'm referring to the kid-gloves treatment the media gave him when he was an up and comer and Hillary Clinton was heavily favored to secure the Democratic nomination.
Even before Obama stunned Clinton by winning the Iowa caucus, the first high-profile showdown between the rivals last fall, the media had all but decreed that Obama would be their darling, the one who could do no wrong.
If Obama was designated "hero," the media had to find a "villain" to complete the convenient story line and, of course, Hillary Clinton was consigned to wear the black hat.
That was then. Now, Obama and his staff must accept the reality that the game has changed as he prepares to battle John McCain. As PBS anchor Jim Lehrer told me a few weeks ago, it wasn't so long ago that McCain was the media's darling.
The story line the media love best is to hail the candidate who was down, but not out, and somehow rallied to achieve a stirring victory. This is McCain's saga over the past year.
Obama has to realize that he will be subject to increasing scrutiny as the campaign really heats up. What we've seen so far is the orchestra tuning up. The real show begins after Labor Day, as the Obama-McCain debate season begins to take shape.
The mainstream media, as well as bloggers who have a point of view, will seek to exploit any situation as a way to create news. Don't forget that all hell broke loose when the New Yorker, which you'd think was solidly behind Obama in his fight against McCain, published (I thought) a biting and witty look at the stereotypical way many Americans view Barack and Michelle Obama.
Still, some accused the magazine of exploiting Obama and his wife. Others said it was a racially insensitive cover. These critics completely missed the point that the New Yorker was mocking bigots in the strongest fashion. Or, perhaps, they wanted to miss the point as a way to advance their arguments.
Members of Barack Obama's campaign thought he got a raw deal from the media during his battle with Hillary Clinton to win the Democratic nomination. Perhaps they were just trying to stir an argument because any fair-minded observer could see that Clinton was the one should have felt mistreated by the press.
Obama had better toughen up -- fast. The media spotlight -- or is it a glare? -- will only get brighter in the months leading up to Election Day. Expect the incessant charges that Obama is too inexperienced and unprepared to be president and a Pollyanna cockeyed optimist to get more shrill, too.
Obama has resented the media for treating him like a presidential candidate -- someone with a personal life, a family and a past. He had better get used to it. The pace is sure to quicken between now and Election Day.
And if you win, Mr. President-Elect, look out. Things can only get worse.
By Jon Friedman
Copyright © 2007 MarketWatch, Inc. All rights reserved
The secrets of tennis legend 
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
... - 10
- next
See all 188 CommentsNews Flash!
Obama''s BOPS to 150,000 on the http://www.BOP-O-METERR.com. McCain''s BOPS hover around 125,000.
red and orange alerts , terrorists over running America,
the world is coming to an end news stories designed to prop up McBushCain
fool! She is not running, moron!
And, Obama''s Media problem is ,of course, as correctly pointed out by so many others here, the right wing propaganda machine, corporate owned media, whose only
real goal is to enrich the likes of McCain and McBush.
Posted by sbbm at 09:34 PM : Aug 11, 2008
The total taxes on income, including payroll taxes and lower tax rates of one sort or another, actually mean the rich don''t pay a higher tax rate than those less well-off. In many cases, the rich pay less. That''s why Bush''s tax cuts were such a bad idea because they rendered meaningless the progressive tax structure that ensured the poor don''t end up paying a higher tax rate than the rich.
As for education, the U.S. still has high levels of education among the world''s countries but you wouldn''t know it from the falling standards of living of those below the 1% richest.
Hillary ''08
and their comments as well as the TV commentators, you can easily see who is (in the background) working
for McCain. They erase the important issues and go for
Obama''s reactions to numerouse stupid comments to him.
I''ve witnessed Tom Brochaw trying to catch him off guard last week with a studid question on gas prices.
But Obama answered it with prompt truths that people
are hurtng out here. I wore an Obama T-shirt at the Ohio State Fair the other day and I got a lot of positive reactions from people. I''am 67 yrs old and I
want to live to see this young man be President and a
*** good one too!!
Posted by guysdigdirt at 07:56 PM : Aug 11, 2008
---------------------------
This is a specious argument promoted by Republicans.
Let me demonstrate with an example:
Imagine a poor guy makes $100
Now, assume the tax rate on the poor guy is 10%.
So his tax is 10% of $100 = $10
Now imagine a rich guy makes $1000
Say, we go easy on him and tax him at 10% as well
(i.e. same tax bracket as that of the poor guy!)
So rich guy''s tax is 10% of $1000 = $100
Total tax collected = $100 + $10 = $110
Rich guy''s share = $100 (almost 90% of tax collected)
Poor''s guy''s share = $10 (only about 10% of tax collected).
Do you see the fallacy?
Because the rich make more income, their portion of tax will always be higher!
On top of it, there are lots of poor guys and only a few rich guys. Despite this the rich guys have a higher portion of the income tax. If anything, that tells you that they are making too much money.
Regardless of the rate, the rich people''s portion will always be higher because they simply make more.
In our proportional taxation system, the rich are taxed at higher rate because they make more and can afford to pay it. Their portion of the overall tax is immaterial.
Posted by jenny1233
Too many people think we need to tax the rich more. They already pay a larger portion of the taxes than they did when Clinton was in office.
Taxing the rich more just becasue they ahve it is like making the straight A student share his grades with the student who parties and gets worse grades. It makes no sense to penalize those who work hard to make up for those who are slackers and lazy.
Mc Cain wants to build 45 nuclear power plants which will be paid for by the utility customers, us. Nuclear power plants take 4-5 years to construct and the cost is added to your bill at 5 billion dollars per plant or 250 billion dollars.
Like I said, I do not care if OBAMA is purple.
Posted by jenny1233
This sounds like you are the ultimate liberal, you want someone else to pay for your power.
The war in Iraq needs to be finished in the correct way, Obama has no clue how to do that.
Sure Obama wants to tax the rich, but the rich also pay more tax now than the lesser paid citizens. Why not take your idea a step further and instead of taxing the rich more make our country a equal income country where everyone makes the same amount. That would solve all the problems right, everyone would pay the same amount of taxes and you would be happy right. But it would not work.
Although i agree with some conservatives, that McCain needs more coverage. It''''d be nice if they decided to cover their sweetheart, McCain- and his confusion and many many foreign policy gaffes.
Posted by dinslc
Obama has had just as many "inncorrect statements" about issues and events. But most of his have been lies on his part to make himself look better and no one plays it up in the news. Obama has been the media sweetheart and they have doted on him relentlessly.
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
... - 10
- next
See all 188 Comments