Sign up for The Media Today, CJRâs daily newsletter.
As E-Day creeps closer, the political press seems to be a bit confused as to how to handle these last few days of campaigning. And understandably soâitâs been a long campaign, and at times it seems like everything that can be said has been said. Nevertheless, thereâs a news hole to fill, and many publications have decided to fill it by reporting (and I use that term generously, in some instances) on the candidateâs endgame stump speeches.
Two examples stick out in particular: one from the AP, the other from the Dallas Morning News.
On Monday, the APâs Beth Fouhy took a closer look at McCainâs latest stump speech. While Fouhy credits McCain for a âwell crafted speech, with stirring references to McCainâs five and a half years as a prisoner war of Vietnam and his plans for the nation,â sheâs quick to note that âhe goes off track when it comes to Obamaâs policies.â
Fouhy goes on to recap and clarify the candidatesâ stances on some important issues, in a good example of the APâs new focus on âaccountability reporting.â The press can’t be afraid to counteract misleading or inaccurate political rhetoric, as CJR and others have argued ad nauseam over the past eighteen months. Fouhy sets the record straight on Obama’s health care plan:
McCain’s central claim â that people will be “forced” into a new government-run plan under an Obama presidency â is not true. In fact, Obama broke with many Democrats and others who advocate universal coverage when he announced his plan would be mandatory only for children, and voluntary for everyone else. Obama would allow those who want to keep their current employer-based health insurance to do so. Rather than requiring everyone to purchase coverage, Obama’s plan is designed to bring down costs â make insurance more affordable so as many people as possible would choose to buy it.
This type of reporting is invaluable, regardless of what stage of the election weâre in. Simply regurgitating the candidatesâ speeches or casually mentioning their well-rehearsed stump recitals does little for voters. While political junkies may think all the facts have been squared away, one would be surprised, for example, at the number of voters still convinced that Obama is a Muslim. If inaccuracies like that still permeate the public, itâs clear our job isnât yet finished.
Another stump speech piece worth mentioning is the advice from editorial columnist William McKenzie, of the Dallas Morning News. In a two-part series, McKenzie decided to help Obama and McCain by letting them know what they should be saying.
For the most part, McKenzieâs advice would do little to persuade undecided voters. Merely name-dropping Senator Kennedy is unlikely to snag a vote, nor will this:
And those who would do us harm should know this: I will never back down from a fight, if a fight is what you wish. If we work together, though, we need not fight. We can live with our differences, instead of letting them lead us into bloodshed.
(That was your cue, Obama.)
While his advice for Obama has limited value, McKenzie does have a few valid points. Hereâs one:
Let me say more about Senator McCain. He’s shown me what it takes to work across the aisle. And that is, you must be willing to make your own party mad.
According to McKenzie, itâs âessentialâ that Obama include his intentions to work across party lines as opposed to attacking the GOP. While Obama may be highlighting how Americans have worked together during these challenging economic times, he doesnât mention his own commitment to encouraging such cooperation in Washington. Itâs hard to say if thatâs necessary to commit voters, but itâs a reasonable proposal.
When it comes to McCain, McKenzieâs advice is far from novel: lighten up on the defense.
âThat’s not the way to win. You win by your own personality and agenda, not making the other guy look small,â writes McKenzie. But he also suggests McCain reaches out to Latino voters, a demographic that could save him on election night:
But we must move forward with this debate, and I want you to know that I believe in a welcoming society. That’s why I will work on immigration until we find a fair, honorable system. And to the rest of you: We either get the education/immigration issue right, or we fail ourselves.
Decent advice, although one canât help wondering whether itâs coming too late. But more important is the concept behind the advice itself. Just as Fouhy continues to contribute substantive reporting, McKenzie saw an opportunity to look beyond the speeches. He could have written a piece detailing the psychology and anatomy behind them.
Instead, he looked to fill in the holes of the candidatesâ speeches. Regardless of their potential success with voters, itâs a valid column in that it doesnât just take the speeches at face value but, instead, looks for what theyâre missing. You donât need to agree with McKenzieâs advice to concede that his is a commendable approach.
Moral of the story: we only have a few days left. Letâs not drop the ball now.
Has America ever needed a media defender more than now? Help us by joining CJR today.