One of the ongoing story lines in this election season is the preponderance of positive media stories for Senator Barack Obama. The latest example was Time’s Joe Klein gleefully speculating what an Obama presidency might look like. (Hat tip: Newsbusters)

 

Articles such as these should be seen by readers as what they really are: propaganda for Obama. To be more precise, the media are engaging in a technique known as the bandwagon:

 

Bandwagon is one of the most common techniques in both wartime and peacetime and plays an important part in modern advertising. Bandwagon is also one of the seven main propaganda techniques identified by the Institute for Propaganda Analysis in 1938. Bandwagon is an appeal to the subject to follow the crowd, to join in because others are doing so as well. Bandwagon propaganda is, essentially, trying to convince the subject that one side is the winning side, because more people have joined it. The subject is meant to believe that since so many people have joined, that victory is inevitable and defeat impossible. Since the average person always wants to be on the winning side, he or she is compelled to join in. However, in modern propaganda, bandwagon has taken a new twist. The subject is to be convinced by the propaganda that since everyone else is doing it, they will be left out if they do not. This is, effectively, the opposite of the other type of bandwagon, but usually provokes the same results. Subjects of bandwagon are compelled to join in because everyone else is doing so as well. When confronted with bandwagon propaganda, we should weigh the pros and cons of joining in independently from the amount of people who have already joined, and, as with most types of propaganda, we should seek more information.

(Emphasis mine)

Various media outlets will point to that unshakeable gospel of public opinion, the polls, as proof that their candidate, Senator Obama, has an insurmountable lead and Senator McCain should just go ahead and save everybody time and effort and concede the race now even though the voting doesn’t take place until November 4. Even Senator Obama can’t help himself from thinking ahead until after the election. (Hat tip: Hugh Hewitt) Perhaps that’s why he is charging admission to the media for his big victory party on Election night.

 

The fatal flaw in this logic is that polls are far from perfect. In fact, there is growing evidence that they are totally unreliable. Even though some media outlets will use an average of polls as a truer barometer of public opinion if each one of the polls that is figured into that average is, in and of itself, imperfect then the average of those polls is also imperfect. You can at least be certain of this much: journalists probably aren’t asking any questions to determine the validity of the poll results.

 

At least signs point to voters realizing by an overwhelming margin that journalists want Senator Obama to win. (Hat tip: Newsbusters) Maybe voters are a whole lot smarter than the media thinks.

Orson Scott Card, who is a best-selling author and a newspaper columnist (and, incidentally, a Democrat) takes the media to task in his latest column for their collective failure to fully investigate the housing crisis (hat tip: Hot Air):

 

This housing crisis didn’t come out of nowhere.  It was not a vague emanation of the evil Bush administration.

It was a direct result of the political decision, back in the late 1990s, to loosen the rules of lending so that home loans would be more accessible to poor people.  Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were authorized to approve risky loans.

What is a risky loan?  It’s a loan that the recipient is likely not to be able to repay.

This is the kind of story that should have received extensive coverage in newspapers all across the country. He goes on to reveal the crux of the story:

 

This was completely foreseeable and in fact many people did foresee it.  One political party, in Congress and in the executive branch, tried repeatedly to tighten up the rules.  The other party blocked every such attempt and tried to loosen them.

Any guesses who tried to fix the problem and who stopped those who wanted to fix it? Don’t take my word for it. Mr. Card nails it:

 

Isn’t there a story here?  Doesn’t journalism require that you who produce our daily paper tell the truth about who brought us to a position where the only way to keep confidence in our economy was a $700 billion bailout?  Aren’t you supposed to follow the money and see which politicians were benefiting personally from the deregulation of mortgage lending?

I have no doubt that if these facts had pointed to the Republican Party or to John McCain as the guilty parties, you would be treating it as a vast scandal.  “Housing-gate,” no doubt.  Or “Fannie-gate.”

Instead, it was Senator Christopher Dodd and Congressman Barney Frank, both Democrats, who denied that there were any problems, who refused Bush administration requests to set up a regulatory agency to watch over Fannie Mae
and Freddie Mac, and who were still pushing for these agencies to go even
further in promoting sub-prime mortgage loans almost up to the minute they
failed.

And then Mr. Card turns his attention to the media:

 

Your job, as journalists, is to tell the truth.  That’s what you claim you do, when you accept people’s money to buy or subscribe to your paper.

But right now, you are consenting to or actively promoting a big fat lie — that the housing crisis should somehow be blamed on Bush, McCain, and the Republicans.  You have trained the American people to blame everything bad — even bad weather — on Bush, and they are responding as you have taught them to.

If you had any personal honor, each reporter and editor would be insisting on telling the truth — even if it hurts the election chances of your favorite candidate.

Because that’s what honorable people do.  Honest people tell the truth even when they don’t like the probable consequences.  That’s what honesty means .  That’s how trust is earned.

 

Take the time to read the entire thing. There’s a reason that people don’t trust the media anymore. A very good reason. 

Senator Barack Obama has often said that running his campaign has given him executive experience to be President. However, this account from inside both campaigns gives reason to pause and consider what his management style is really like:

 

Obama’s campaign schedule is fuller, more hectic and seemingly improvisational. The Obama aides who deal with the national reporters on the campaign plane are often overwhelmed, overworked and un-informed about where, when, why or how the candidate is moving about. Baggage calls are preposterously early with the explanation that it’s all for security reasons.
 
If so, I would love to have someone from Obama’s campaign explain why the entire press corps, the Secret Service, and the local police idled for two hours in a Miami hotel parking lot recently because there was nothing to do and nowhere to go. It was not an isolated case.
 
The national headquarters in Chicago airily dismisses complaints from journalists wondering why a schedule cannot be printed up or at least e-mailed in time to make coverage plans. Nor is there much sympathy for those of us who report for a newscast that airs in the early evening hours. Our shows place a premium on live reporting from the scene of campaign events. But this campaign can often be found in the air and flying around at the time the “CBS Evening News with Katie Couric” is broadcast. I suspect there is a feeling within the Obama campaign that the broadcast networks are less influential in the age of the internet and thus needn’t be accomodated as in the days of yore. Even if it’s true, they are only hurting themselves by dissing audiences that run in the tens of millions every night.

Keep in mind this is from a mainstream media reporter and they are, by all accounts, in the tank for the Democratic senator. But check out what he has to say next about Senator McCain’s campaign:

 

The McCain folks are more helpful and generally friendly. The schedules are printed on actual books you can hold in your hand, read, and then plan accordingly. The press aides are more knowledgeable and useful to us in the news media. The events are designed with a better eye, and for the simple needs of the press corps. When he is available, John McCain is friendly and loquacious. Obama holds news conferences, but seldom banters with the reporters who’ve been following him for thousands of miles around the country. Go figure.
 
The McCain campaign plane is better than Obama’s, which is cramped, uncomfortable and smells terrible most of the time. Somehow the McCain folks
manage to keep their charter clean, even where the press is seated.
 
The other day in Albuquerque, N.M., the reporters were given almost no time to file their reports after McCain spoke. It was an important, aggressive speech, lambasting Obama’s past associations. When we asked for more time to write up his remarks and prepare our reports, the campaign readily agreed to it. They understood.

 

Senator McCain has plenty of reason to not be very friendly towards reports given the reprehensible treatment he and his running mate have received from some media outlets. Yet his staff is far more courteous and attentive to reporters’ needs.

 

Little details like this can make a huge impression. Successful organizations understand the importance of making sure everything works well. How these two men choose to treat the press speaks volumes about what kind of executives each of these men will be.

 

As the Bible says, “Whoever can be trusted with very little can also be trusted with much, and whoever is dishonest with very little will also be dishonest with much.” (Luke 16:10)

Governor Sarah Palin hit a monumental home run with her debate performance tonight and put to rest all those pesky doubts about her abilities to serve as Vice-President. Of course, her supporters already knew she was up to the job. It was the media naysayers and Beltway pundits that had to be reminded of the innate talents this women possesses that haven’t been seen in another politician since Ronald Reagan.

 

Senator Joe Biden turned in a fair performance himself. No major gaffes but lots of false statements.

 

Still, this debate was all about Governor Palin. It served as a reminder as why voters like her so much. It also reminded us of when she is really at her best: when she can speak directly to the American people without any assistance (or is that interference?) from the media.

 

So, here is my advice to the McCain campaign: put Governor Palin on every talk radio show both national and local that you can get her on over the next four weeks and let her use her immense communication skills in speaking directly to voters. Have her sit down with the high traffic bloggers and let them record podcasts or video interviews that are completely unedited and, more importantly, unfiltered.

 

Don’t bother granting any more interviews to Katie Couric, Charlie Gibson, or any of the other MSM dinosaurs. They don’t deserve the privilege of talking to her.

 

Governor Palin is at her best when she can speak from the heart directly to the people without having to worry about “gotcha” questions from a hostile media that is totally in the tank for Senator Barack Obama. Bypass all the traditional media outlets and take your message directly to the voters. It will have a far greater impact than you can possibly imagine.

 

I’m scheduled to appear on World, Have Your Say on the BBC World Service between 1pm and 2pm ET today. We’ll be discussing tonight’s vice-presidential debate and the influence of the media on the election. You can hear the program online at the BBC World Service homepage or on Sirius and XM Radio.

Just when you think that the mainstream media can’t sink any lower comes this breathless dispatch from the Associated Press: Palin Church Promotes Converting Gays.

 

ANCHORAGE, Alaska – Gov. Sarah Palin’s church is promoting a conference that promises to convert gays into heterosexuals through the power of prayer.

“You’ll be encouraged by the power of God’s love and His desire to transform the lives of those impacted by homosexuality,” according to the insert in the bulletin of the Wasilla Bible Church, where Palin has prayed since she was a child.
 
Palin’s conservative Christian views have energized that part of the GOP electorate, which was lukewarm to John McCain’s candidacy before he named her as his vice presidential choice. She is staunchly anti-abortion, opposing exceptions for rape and incest, and opposes gay marriage and spousal rights for gay couples. 

Focus on the Family, a national Christian fundamentalist organization, has scheduled the “Love Won Out” Conference for Sept. 13 in Anchorage, about 30 miles from Wasilla.

Palin, campaigning with McCain in the Midwest on Friday, has not publicly expressed a view on the so-called “pray away the gay” movement. Larry Kroon, senior pastor at Palin’s church, was not available to discuss the matter Friday, said a church worker who declined to give her name.

As usual, facts don’t seem to matter to the media. For one thing, Governor Palin and her family have only been part of the church since 2002.

 

For another, the AP seems shocked, shocked that Governor Palin’s church would actually be teaching what the Bible says.

 

Also, they totally mischaracterize the nature of the conference. According to the questions page on the conference website they don’t “cure” gays.

 

Are you here to “cure” gays?
Absolutely not. The only time you’ll ever hear the word “cure” used in relation to our event is by those who oppose Love Won Out.  They also like to claim we want to “fix” or “convert” gays and lesbians and that we believe people can “pray away the gay.” Such glib characterizations ignore the complex series of factors that can lead to same-sex attractions; they also mischaracterize our mission. We exist to help men and women dissatisfied with living homosexually understand that same-sex attractions can be overcome. It is not easy, but it is possible, as evidenced by the thousands of men and women who have walked this difficult road successfully.

In typical fashion, the AP distorts not only the role of the church in promoting the conference but also the nature of the conference itself. It also describes Focus on the Family as a “fundamentalist” organization. And it’s kind of ironic that the “pray away the gay” talking point cited on the website ended up in the text of the AP story.

 

But the bigger question is why this is even a story? How is it that Governor Palin’s church gets raked over the coals for including a promotional insert in a church bulletin while, say, Senator Obama’s church escapes any real scrunity when his pastor of twenty years has been caught on video preaching hate from the pulpit? If candidates’ churches are now fair game to media scrutiny then why not subject each candidate’s church to the same level of scrutiny?

 

I’m not holding my breath waiting for it to happen.