The Media's "Obama-Remorse"

MarketWatch's Jon Friedman Says President-Elect Should Remember That What Goes Up, Must Come Down

(MarketWatch)  I'm starting to feel a little guilty about the media's treatment of President-elect Barack Obama -- and I may not be the only one.

Chalk it up to a phenomenon I'd like to call "Obama-remorse." You know how you feel buyer's remorse after you've spent a lot of dough on some big-ticket item, only to realize that you might have made a mistake? Well, it's going to happen to the president-elect as well.

Perhaps this sort of recognition prompted Washington Post media writer Howard Kurtz to do an incisive piece called "A Giddy Sense of Boosterism" on Nov. 17. As Kurtz noted, the media have tripped over themselves to celebrate and cash in on Obama's victory.

NBC News is preparing a DVD called "Yes, We Can: The Barack Obama Story." ABC and USA Today are racing to publish a book on the election. HBO is readying a documentary on the campaign, too.

As I see it, the media are having second thoughts about their performance over the past year.

First, they gave Sen. Hillary Clinton the cold shoulder and all but rolled out a red carpet for Obama during the Democratic primary season. Perhaps Amy Poehler's eerily spot-on send-up of Clinton on "Saturday Night Live" helped reduce the New York senator to a caricature, making it even easier for the reporters to consign her to a complementary role.

Once Clinton was dispatched, they lavished favorable attention on Obama, as his opponent, Republican Sen. John McCain, was forced to watch from the shadows.

Yes, I'm thrilled that he won the election, underscoring the American ideal that we live in a foreword-thinking democracy, where any man or woman can rise to the highest office in the land. And I'm proud that even Obama's staunchest foes -- particularly the man he defeated, John McCain -- seem to be willing to accept his victory and pledge to help him turn around the economy and cure the nation's other ills.

Adulation Express

But I also feel guilty because I know that the media's Adulation Express -- never to be confused with McCain's old Straight Talk Express -- is going to hit a few speed bumps before it inexorably grinds to a halt.

It's inevitable. Look at what happened to Sarah Palin, McCain's running mate.

When McCain first nominated her, she could do no wrong in the media's eyes. She was hailed for her aw-shucks demeanor, in contrast to the inveterate Beltway sharpies, and her unlikely ascent to such a big job (I suspect that Tina Fey's brilliant impersonation of Palin on "Saturday Night Live" owed as much to Palin's newness as it did to Fey's uncanny ability to look and sound like the governor of Alaska. Most SNL viewers had no frame of reference for Palin, other than her speech at the Republican National Convention, so Fey didn't have to worry about competing with a hardened image of Palin).

It's inevitable, too, that Obama will eventually have his turn under the microscope. When the media start picking apart some of his Cabinet choices or his pronouncements on the state of the economy or his declarations about Iraq, he may be surprised to find that the afterglow of his stunning victory turns sour so fast.

MEDIA WEB QUESTION OF THE WEEK: Have the media treated President-elect Barack Obama too kindly for the past year - and, if so, should that kind of treatment end now that he has won the election?

Join the online community of Media Web readers by posting comments directly to the MarketWatch.com site.

[ilsadago]

"Buyer''s remorse". LMAO! After cramming him down our throats for nearly 2 years but not telling us a thing about him, I hope that the media''s penance is long and difficult. Oh, and did you see the other opinion piece that says we get to hear about ''Right Wing Conspiracy'' again for at least the next 4 years? We have the Clinton administration back - and Hillary (ugh) - so we can expect that all the same paranoid, ineffective, sloppy, and one-sided reporting will continue. God save us all.

[nojoy01]

''Surely people would agree that the public airwaves should be open to all. Allowing news and opinion from both right and left equal time makes good sense to share resources which belong to all.''

Posted by macusweil at 01:00 PM : Nov 29, 2008

Of course the ''public airways should be open to all'' And they are. All you have to do is do it the same way the conservatives did. Find something that people WANT to talk about, find somebody to BUY the airtime so they can advertise their products. Oh, wait, you are talking about mandating equal air time for opposing points of view. Well, NEWS FLASH. If a few million people wanted to get on the air & talk about their ''liberal'' points of view and/or try to have a debate then there would be advertisers lined up around the block to PAY for the necessary air time & literally thousands of radio stations willing to take part of the profits available. You do not get it, do you? The only reason all of those ''conservative'' talk shows are on the air is that there is money to be made buying & selling the air time. You want to mandate equal time, great, just do not use my tax dollars to do it. Come up with your own *** money.

[tmittelstaed]

Oh come off it, the media''s favorite thing in the world is to overestimate their own importance. And the losers in an election always blame the media for pushing their competitor.

[lleidwinger]

Obviously many respondents are afraid of change and fear something progressive and different. We need an inspirational leader who brings people together rather the divisive politics we''ve been exposed to for the past 8 yrs.

[scone47]

"Have the media treated President-elect Barack Obama too kindly for the past year - and, if so, should that kind of treatment end now that he has won the election?"

You''re kidding? Right? You''re not actually asking the question, "Were we so blinded by the Messiah that we failed to ask ONE SINGLE RELEVANT question about his background, ethics, associations, history, voting record, beliefs, friends, family, etc, etc, etc..."

Is this what you''re asking? And now you ask, "What should we do about it now?"

And you wonder why the American public likes talk radio?

[jowand]

After promoting Obama every day for over a year, Tom Brokaw during a discussion with Charlie Rose says, we don''t know anything about this guy or what he''s going to do.

[michaelave]

The media really loves Obama. However, it will slowly cool its enthusiasm for him, because he is a superficial thinker. He tends to deal with symptons rather than root causes. Gradually, over time, this will become apparent in the outcome of his policies and decisions.

[rev_miesse]

-DESERVES YOU RIGHT VOTING FOR A SNAKE OIL SALES MAN.

Posted by HK4U at 09:40 AM : Nov 29, 2008

That would be "serves you right."

I''m not familiar with snake oil. I hope nobody takes this as a commercial plug but I use Quaker State synthetic 5W30. As far as I know Obama has nothing to do with it but there is a picture of Jeff Gordon on the bottle. I also use Purolator PureOne filters.
Change every 3000 miles or 3 months, whichever comes first. YMMV.

[jowand]

Surely people would agree that the public airwaves should be open to all. Allowing news and opinion from both right and left equal time makes good sense to share resources which belong to all.

Posted by macusweil at 01:00 PM : Nov 29, 2008

Go get your own radio show, go and put the years of hard work in first quit complaining.
CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN...etc.. are all 24/7/365 Liberal Coffee Shop Marxist spin machines, massaging the new and conversation to promote their Liberal political views. At least talk radio is honest enough to admit what they are doing, not like the lying Liberal hypocrites running the tv networks.

[macusweil]

"Doesn''''t CBS realize that this kind of pandering to dwindling Republicon tribe isn''''t what sells the news or wins elections anymore?"

Actually we should respect CBS because they post multiple points of view on their opinion page. It allows us to see both side of an issue and formulate our own decisions.

This is what is exactly missing with conservative and right wing religious talk radio. These programs for years have only allowed one side of the story to be heard. This subjected millions of Americans to a very one sided view of issues using public airwaves.

Mono-sided talk radio was also very successful because these often taint view points would inciting anger to create false sense of strong emotion leading folks to open their pocket books. The daily collection was made to advance "the cause" or somehow prevent the opponent from getting an upper hand.

Surely people would agree that the public airwaves should be open to all. Allowing news and opinion from both right and left equal time makes good sense to share resources which belong to all.

[charlesjr9]

If you feel the need for damage control, don''t. MCcain rana horrible campaign and it was obvious you reported it as you should have. all of you sore losers would rather the country fail than to bne standup Americans. I was afraid the US of A was going to flub the ball again. Happily they stood up and said no! You did good.

[charlesjr9]

If your trying some damagr control don''t. McCain ran a no campaign. No substance, no platform, no class, no change and we said no. Obama out classed McCain and you guys wrote about. It was so obvious, what else could you have done or said?

[macusweil]

"Americans can''''t be fooled anymore... Posted by Rowdydfw"

So true, which is exactly why the the liberal agenda in the JFK tradition will dominant US govt policy for the next decade. We''ve seen through the free spending Republican lies and their taint ideologies.

Now severing: the best interests of the American people not special interest or cronies.

The unbridled hate speech of right wing conservatives and radical American clerics will soon be "more fair and balanced" balanced on the public airwaves.

It will take 20 years to undo the staggering deficits of Reagan & Bush and to turn forward their reactionary agendas. It''s great to see American has at least finally made that turn in the road.

[ohiolad]

It is good to know that some in the MSM are feeling twangs of buyers remorse over the ways they behaved during the election. Whether it is ever possible to regain their credibility as journalists is another matter. Throughout the campaign the MSM acted as sychophantic lapdogs, tirelessly accentuating Obama''s positives and downplaying or ignoring his negatives, while doing the opposite for McCain/Palin. More the anyone else, those in the MSM bear the responsibility for an Obama victory because unfortunately for too many the MSM is their sole source of news and the sole shaper of their worldview. Because the MSM have so much invested in an Obama success, it is difficult to see how they could now suddenly start to report the news objectively with a critical eye. So we can expect to see the MSM continuing to act as propagandists for the Obama administration. Whatever future mishaps occur, the Obama administration will not be criticized, so long as someone else can be conveniently blamed.

[runCMD]

This election has been quite a wake up call for me. I had in my mind that ''black'' America was somehow above the stereotypical bigotry practiced by ''white'' America of the past. But given an opportunity to swell with pride over the fact that someone of color is the president is very disheartening. People - don''t teach you kids that a black man can grow up to be president. Teach your kids that ANY one can grow up to be president. The overwhelming sense of pride I now see in my black friends and neighbors has helped me see that there is little difference in what used to be bad for one - is now so easily embraced by the other. Pride in color is bad regardless of which color is feeling it. Be proud of the positive choices you''ve made in your life - not over the pigment you were born with. One step forward and two steps back.

[rev_miesse]

-The one thing I have noticed by reading CBS and other mainstream media comment boards is that a whole lot of sycphant Obama lap-dogs are having serious second thoughts about voting for this sorry MFer.

Posted by libsRcrooks at 07:17 AM : Nov 29, 2008

Nah, its just you trying to discredit President-Elect Obama before he is even sworn in.
Face it, bub, your republicans lost and lost big. Why did you lose? Because your ideas suck. Your candidates suck. Your campaign strategy sucks.
And now you hate America because you lost. You want this country to fail so you can self-righteously thump your chest and say "I told you so."
Since you favor a one party system so much, China or Russia might like to have you as a citizen. You certainly don''t belong here.

[piercetheval]

...by astrological analysis of Obamas'''' natal BIRTH chart and of the composite natal chart he shares with this nation, his "Part of Catastrophe" is ''''economics'''' and ''''war''''...we have been truly a$$ invaded

[piercetheval]

...by astrological analysis of Obamas'' natal bityh chart and of the composite natal chart he shares with this nation his "Part of Catastrophe" is ''economics'' and ''war''...we have been truly a$$ invaded!

[chad55555]

I WILL NEVER UNDERSTAAND HOW SO MANY INTELLIGENT PEOPLE WERE FOOLED INTO THINKING B.O WOULD MAKE A LEADER,IT''S TAKES MORE THEN A LOUD VOICE AND BEING BLACK TO LEAD A COUNTRY OUT OF WHAT WILL SOON BE A DEPRESSION(WORSE).THIS PERSON HAS BEEN PREDICTED IN REVELATION AS THE ANTI-CHRIST OR HIS HELPER TO PUT THE FALSE LEADER IN WOELD POWER.THE LEADERS THAT HAVE ALREADY SPOKE AND SEEN HIM SAID HE HAS NO IDEA WHAT HE''S TALKING ABOUT OR WHAT IS GOING ON IN THE WORLD.
IT STATES EVERYONE WILL BE FOOLED INTO THINKING HE IS THE ANSWER TO ALL PROBLEMS, READ YOUR BIBLE(CHRISTIAN GOD THAT STARTED THIS COUNTRY)IT''S HAM''S PEOPLE THAT CREATES THE PROBLEMS.
JUST FOOD FOR THOUGHT !
WHAT IF IT''S TRUE? WE ARE IN FOR THE TOUGHEST TIME THIS WORLD HAS EVER SEEN,THANKS TO HOW EASY SO MANY WERE FOOLED BY A LIE. LOOKS LIKE THIS WAS SET UP BY A HIGHER POWER BECAUSE THE OTHER TWO PEOPLE RUNNING FOR OFFICE WERE SO BAD A DOG COULD HAVE BEAT THEM.

[skeezix06]

I''m sorry. Basically, I think we''re in for a period of stagnation in "the center".

Obama''s team is anything but change (check out his picks so far). McCain was certainly not change. Clinton''s change was probably limited. The people who might have brought about change were ignored by the media and shut out early in the primaries. The entire system appears to be rigged and realistically, I don''t think our votes count any more.