Back to Clive Crook's blog homepage
Column: Issues are ignored in this American image war
July 28, 2008
Barack Obama’s trip to Europe and the Middle East did what it was supposed to. It untapped a stream of presidential images: the candidate addressing 200,000 delighted Berliners; the candidate mingling comfortably with American soldiers, riding in military helicopters like a commander-in-chief; the candidate dealing with foreign leaders as an equal. For most voters, it is the images that will stick – what else was there? – and they are priceless. John McCain’s chief line of attack against Mr Obama, that he lacks experience especially in foreign affairs, has been blunted if not neutralised.
Poor Mr McCain had the worst week of his campaign. Unable to lie low and let Mr Obama have his European moment, the only wise course, he made matters worse. He ran a television spot that said “blame Obama for the high price of gas”, a patently ludicrous assertion. (Republicans were laughing at their own candidate.) Campaign officials said he might announce his vice-presidential choice – a sad and unsuccessful attempt to steal some of Mr Obama’s limelight. And having spent months goading Mr Obama for his lack of foreign affairs experience, Mr McCain portrayed his own schedule of dreary and sparsely attended small-town events as proof of his superior authenticity.
In this election, the image war is turning into a rout. As Mr Obama grows in self-assurance (not that he was lacking any to begin with), Mr McCain looks older and less sure-footed. The greater surprise, though, and the real let-down in this campaign, is that the image war is all there is. In a way, last week’s contrasts sum things up. And what a pity this is. This was supposed to be an election about substance, with candidates – each of them an outsider in his own way – capable of mutual respect, capable of challenging party loyalists and keen to engage with each other in a new kind of politics. Instead we have the old kind of politics, only more so.
The remainder of this column can be read here. Please post comments below.
This is one of Clive Crook’s best columns. The issues are being treated by the candidates and the media as if American voters were all sixth graders (my apologies to sixth graders for saying this). Moreover the most important issue of all, namely the erosion of our basic freedoms in favor of moving toward an Orwellian state of total surveillance, arbitrary detention, torture, government secrecy and unlimited executive power, is almost never mentioned at all in the media or by the candidates.
Senator Obama used to talk about this every now and then during the primary campaign, but in keeping with his new “centrist” persona, he seems to have lost interest in this crucial issue as well.
Many Americans in both parties are also interested in a number of other vital issues that the media refuse to touch, such as the role of Big Oil, not only in the decision to invade Iraq, but in the perceived importance of staying there for a greater or lesser time in the future.
If this ever was “conspiracy theory”, it certainly ceased to be with the publication of Alan Greenspan’s memoirs last year, in which he wrote to the effect that the Iraq invasion was mainly about oil.
Do not look for this topic to come up on the next campaign ad or sound bite that you see on CNN, MSNBC or, least likely of all, Fox News, which has never been anything more than the voice of the Republican National Committee.
It is also a shame that one sees so little about the above two issues even in the pages of the FT. They both have a great deal more to do with what kind of country America will be in the future than does Michelle Obama’s wardrobe, let alone which supermarket aisle John McCain was standing in when he made his latest gaffe.
The plain fact is that our corporate controlled media are neither independent nor objective and have a vested interest in making sure that American voters are as badly informed as possible about the real issues. The media’s purpose is to make sure that the voters will be distracted from any attempt to learn about these issues by an endless diet of crime, celebrities and political trivia, instead of any semblance of real political coverage.
Posted by: algasema | July 28th, 2008 at 3:40 am | Report this commentI second algasema’s comments as well as Mr. Crook’s with one exception.
Although Mr. Crook can criticize the American electorate for a lack of desire for any remotely intelligent discussion by candidates of crucial issues affecting it, the fact of the matter is that many people amazingly obtain whatever meager information they base voting decisions on from television. Needless to say, current television programming is an even vaster wasteland than at earlier times - simply because there were fewer channels before and before the advent of so-called reality shows - unquestionably the lowest form of programming - until we start showing the equivalent of gladiators fighting to the death (not far away given the trends).
Television is driven by consumer advertising. The purpose and depth of consumer advertising is the same as the abysmal coverage of political campaigns - it is meant to sell something - not on its merits or lack thereof but on something peripheral and phony, selling beer by associating conquest of women to drinking the beer advertised or selling deodorant to women because it will “liberate” them and give them confidence.
So long as advertising-support is the dominant paradigm (the only paradigm for anything approaching news reporting with the exception of PBS and C-SPAN which too few people watch anyway) the same drivel will be served up to the watcher with the same results in terms of voter awareness of issues. The airwaves are presumably owned by the people and should be controlled as such. Look at what C-SPAN has done in regard to news presentation. Light years ahead of any commercial network or PBS for all of PBS’s good qualities. And C-SPAN is funded by private cable oligopolists!
Posted by: Wendell Murray | July 28th, 2008 at 9:12 am | Report this commentPublic transportation, GSEs, quality TV, a national health service… in many sectors of the US economy the American free market capitalism system does not want to deliver or play a role because it simply isn’t profitable enough or will never be profitable.
Instead it self-destructs through its excesses (as Schumpeter said it would) but pockets its profits beforehand, and then fails in its role as employer and taxpayer.
Considering that the USA has never had to fight a war against an invading enemy since … the late 18th century?.., the standard of living in the USA should have been very much higher by now, and crime and disease should have been virtually wiped out. Instead, it is quite possible that the present standard of living in the USA may not improve much from now on, in fact it may not even be sustainable at the present level,
UNLESS THE STATE STEPS IN TO PLAY A ROLE
in areas where free market capitalism doesn’t want to get involved. The social market economy system (the “mixed economy” system) functions well in Scandinavia, and in the Netherlands, Germany and Switzerland.
But Americans seem to fear the words “socialism” and “socialist” like the devil fears holy water (to use a German simile).
Posted by: J.J. | July 28th, 2008 at 12:14 pm | Report this commentWHY?
Becasuse, J.J. “socialist” is merely a propaganda term in America, akin to “communist” (or, these days, “terrorist” or, most horrible of all, “illegal alien”) used to smear anyone opposed to our laissez-faire, robber baron economy. Few Americans have any real idea what socialism really is. To be candid, I am not sure that I do either.
Posted by: algasema | July 28th, 2008 at 1:39 pm | Report this comment@ algasema. Here’s a link below with a short description of the “Soziale Marktwirtschaft” (aka “mixed economy”).
Not allowing US ports on the west coast to be taken over by Qatar(?) is what one might expect in a mixed economy. Ensuring that Fan & Fred survive is another example.
Maybe the US economy will morph by stealth into more of a mixed economy?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_market_economy
Posted by: J.J. | July 28th, 2008 at 3:28 pm | Report this commentMr Clive Crook ends this column with: “In a free country, you get the media and the politicians you deserve.” It is unfair to extend personal responsibility from choosing political representatives to having well-functioning means of mass delivery of information, no more than you can directly hold responsible every individual who lives in a dictatorship.
The wilfully ignored story here is about systemic problems in US the mass media. With all large outlets being privately owned and depending on private sponsors for monthly revenue, it is no wonder that the least informed consumers of information are given as biased and cheap a product as the broadcaster can get away with.
The widening access to the Internet is causing some changes to this situation. I have better access to the BBC, but I won’t take personal credit for that.
Posted by: MeeMee | July 28th, 2008 at 3:33 pm | Report this commentAlternatively,
Where Socialism is tried in the US, it is not so hot. Public Schools are certainly socialized, and are a disaster. Public Pensions, again are socialized, and are a pending disaster if not reformed. Given that the US healthcare system is somewhere around 40% government funded, it is not too hard to see where it is going as well ($300,000 diversity officers/senators wives at no-show jobs at the University of Chicago for example)
I agree with CC’s point that the media is ignoring major issues, but the problems with Socialism in the US are already identified.
JBP
Posted by: John Powers | July 28th, 2008 at 4:06 pm | Report this commentJBP. The reasons for the success of the social component in the economies of some countries in Northern & Western Europe are as varied as are no doubt the reasons for the failure of public schools and some parts of the health care system in the USA. There have to be INCENTIVES for
those who are getting publicly-funded education and health care so that they develop a sense of responsibility and on the other hand, a government has to see to it that further occupational training e.g. apprenticeships, are available for young people who will not go to university (for whatever reason) but should be given some prospect of a reasonably normal life (decent job, family, pension…).
To ensure that people take care of their health is first and foremost a matter of the prevention of illness and bad habits, spreading information at school and via the media, obligatory sports at school etc., to encourage a sensible, healthy life-style.
Any economy needs to have as many fit people, educated to a reasonable minimum standard, in jobs as possible. No doubt this is an ongoing struggle for the state-subsidized social services, even in countries like Germany and Switzerland, where the mixed economy model is accepted but expect their citizens to behave responsibly and increasingly apply sanctions if they don’t. But the struggle must go on, otherwise a country finds itself with a “Lumpenproletariat”, Webster’s New World College dictionary’s definition of which is “groups of people belonging to a low or contemptible segment of their class or kind because of their unproductiveness, shiftlessness, alienation, degeneration etc”.
Posted by: J.J. | July 28th, 2008 at 5:31 pm | Report this commentClive Crook is bang on the money with his column today. The American public are getting the media and the campaign they deserve.
To me, it is abstolutely amazing that healthcare is in effect deemed too expensive when the US taxpayer is funding a “defence” budget hundreds of billions of dollars per year greater than is needed to protect the national security of the country.
Posted by: James Canning | July 28th, 2008 at 6:37 pm | Report this comment“Given that the US healthcare system is somewhere around 40% government funded”
It is actually about 45% government-funded, but ultimately all payments come from citizens’ pockets whether through taxation or through forgone income as employees or out-of-pocket.
The nedical services (aka healthcare) system in the USA is by several factors - not just some high percentage - the poorest-functioning in the world. Not only are costs more than 2 times the OECD average per capita, but health status outcomes are roughly 40th in the world. An abysmal cost/benefit ratio.
All due to the non-socialization of funding. Socialization of delivery ala NHS is not needed, but delivery as a system is laughably poor all because of the pretense that private medical services delivering entities operate or can operate on a competitive basis. They cannot and do not, ergo massive waste of resources.
JBP: please limit your ideologically-determined comments to at most one area - how about only death and destruction wrought by the USA in Iraq? Straying into other policy areas while oblivious to facts is too much to handle for conscientious readers of this column. Why is it that extreme right-wingisti cannot ever deal with facts anyway?
Posted by: Wendell Murray | July 28th, 2008 at 7:07 pm | Report this commentPerhaps Wendell,
But it sounds like you are agreeing with me on the botched healthcare system. It is pretty much socialized now, and it does not work all that well.
On to death and destruction…
11 US Deaths in Iraq this month; 30 Murders in Chicago, 20 of which were in Sen. Obama’s Illinois Senate district.
JBP
Posted by: John Powers | July 28th, 2008 at 7:53 pm | Report this comment@James: “Clive Crook is bang on the money with his column today. The American public are getting the media […] they deserve.”
Why is this so? What different action can one person do to influence the tone, depth and quality of the largest media outlets, even if a little? There are few options with even lower overall diversity and not watching anything would be even worse.
By comparison, even in the current non-proportional two-party electoral system, your vote does count a little, most of the time, so you are partly responsible for your politicians.
Posted by: MeeMee | July 28th, 2008 at 9:13 pm | Report this commentThe topic here was the media, really important in any democracy.
((( Wendell: “how about only death and destruction wrought by the USA in Iraq?”
JBP replies: “11 US Deaths in Iraq this month; 30 Murders in Chicago”.
Deaths in a foreign country=deaths of US citizens in a foreign country?
Your numbers are wrong, but perhaps you meant to compare the murder rate of a 20-odd million people country with that of a relatively violent US city ten times as small in population. I hear they really are similar. You presumably conclude that things are not so bad for the Iraqis. The question is, why aren’t they still grateful? )))
The topic here was the media, really important in any democracy.
Posted by: MeeMee | July 28th, 2008 at 9:31 pm | Report this commentthats what you’re a motivational speaker
Posted by: Sade | July 29th, 2008 at 2:44 pm | Report this commentClive Crook is absolutely correct, but he seems to imply that things have been different with American national politics, and that strikes me as rather naive.
American national politics have always been about personality, since the days when George Washington plied voters (then only the elite voters of the Electoral College mattered) with liquor, and they have only steadily gone downhill since.
It is now completely marketing and advertising and manipulated perceptions.
Marketing, America’s one authentic intellectual contribution to the world, dominates thinking there completely.
In products, services, politics and even religion, you will find not just its influence but its dominance as a way of thinking and operating.
The duopoly of the Republicans and Democrats behaves exactly the way we see Coke and Pepsi or McDonald’s and Burger King behaving.
Neither party stands for anything consistently other than the desire to maximize its election success.
The Republicans, for example, rather than a true conservative party have been a party of big spending and lowering taxes (for some), thus becoming the party of massive economic irresponsibility and huge debts.
The Republicans also, rather than the true conservative ideal of non-interference in private lives, have been the party of Christian hucksters trying to tell everyone what to do, the party of the paranoid ready to spy on everyone in every possible way, and the party of unethical business practices.
The dominance of marketing and advertising is why we have the dominance of money in American politics, something in the past McCain himself displayed considerable concern. America on the national level is today a de facto plutocracy. Big contributors get access and influence. Ordinary people are only marketing data points and the occasional subject of photo-ops.
Also, there is a consensus amongst America’s powerful on what I might call the really big issues. For example, we really do not see the Democrats – half a century ago portrayed as the party of the working man and woman – standing up against deficits which put a huge future burden on ordinary Americans. We do not see them standing up as a party against ugly colonial wars like Iraq to which overwhelmingly the sons and daughters of ordinary Americans are sent. We do not see them standing up against torture and abuse in the (false) name of security. And we do not see them standing up against laws which twist and distort every aspect of the Constitution protecting ordinary people against the abuse of the privileged.
So the combination and inter-workings of manipulative politics, money to pay for the manipulation, and the interests of the powerful who supply money for the manipulation make American democracy and national politics a fairly hollow set of institutions.
Added to this is the corporate structure of the country. Most people having good jobs have them with large corporations. Have you ever seen a democratic corporation? Corporations, with minor variations, operate much the way military organizations do.
Effectively, the main economic structure of America is an anti-democratic institution, one both with leverage over employees (and foreign readers cannot appreciate the full impact of this which includes a family’s health care insurance, corporate and government employed Americans being pretty much the only ones with decent insurance) and with the access and resources to largely have its way.
In the end, at least at this time, it perhaps doesn’t really matter that the political body politic is so warped, because the consensus of powerful people in America will keep the nation headed on the same course it has been on for decades. The America voter is faced not so much with a meaningful choice of policy directions as a choice of the person who will represent them collectively as both head of state and head of government.
And the truth is that even where there are domestic issues with some choice possible, so few politicians keep their promises or are able to keep their promises, that voting for an issue in America is a pretty hollow exercise. The best the voters really get is to choose between two individuals for personal characteristics which seem more agreeable.
Final note to one poster, the Pentagon and the defense industry plus the intelligence monstrosity make the greatest socialist entity in the world, one utterly without civilian and human-rights values, one with no competition, no democratic values, and a dangerous one. But American conservatives always think that is just fine. It’s the schools and social programs that are evil ands inefficient. Childish nonsense.
Posted by: JOHN CHUCKMAN, TORONTO | July 29th, 2008 at 2:46 pm | Report this commentMeeMee asks what one person can do to improve to flow of vital information to the US public from the media. Brian Williams of NBC broadcast from Tehran last night, and he included significant portions of his interview with Mahmoud Ahmadi-Nejad in the news broadcast. Individual viewers who e-mail NBC to commmend this superb and vitally important news presentation can help to bring influence to bear on content.
I recommend viewing Williams’ interview with the Iranian president. Ahmadi-Nejad made more good sense regarding the efficacy of nuclear weapons in the 21st Century than anything I have heard from John McCain. (Obama also should view this interview.)
Posted by: James Canning | July 29th, 2008 at 6:25 pm | Report this comment@James Canning: I agree very much with you about email and I think your point is stronger if you broaden it to other new tools from the internet age such as easy replay of video clips, public comments boxes, and blogs in their role of information organizers.
Those are all new forces, yet the old forces are still in place: a desire to please your advertisers, to avoid flak from lobbying groups, to avoid upsetting or taxing your audience and (not least!) to provide as cheap a product as they can get away with.
In the case of TV you get runaway-bride-crazes (cheap, looks just like information), colourful segment separators instead of well-staffed foreign bureaux, etc. I live in Europe and I am very happy that each country here runs a public broadcaster free from many of the above pressures and keeping the private media from straying too much in those directions. (I’m undecided re the influences in the opposite direction, but there are no choices to be made on that front.)
Cheers,
Posted by: MeeMee | July 29th, 2008 at 9:15 pm | Report this commentMM
A great post, John Chuckman of Toronto. This is as good a description as it gets of the reality of the American political system. For once, I have nothing to add.
Posted by: algasema | July 29th, 2008 at 9:27 pm | Report this comment@James Canning: Sorry, forgot to defend my point, that US citizens should not be blamed for the media there.
In an perfect marketplace, consumers have perfect information on the products they purchase.
In the case of media, many consumers often are just unable to judge whether they are getting a reasonable amount of reliable, pertinent information. Even straight up propaganda may go undetected, as in a recent case of war-selling.
When you are uninformed, whole central concepts are unavailable to you. I am talking about a role of media which borders on education, or, perverted, mis-education.
Posted by: MeeMee | July 29th, 2008 at 9:42 pm | Report this comment“To be a human means first and foremost to be a member of the human family. Instead of that, national education makes us narrow, national, planetarily irrelevant, often hostile and aggressive national beings.” Robert Mueller, former U.N. Secretary
It is unintelligent to think that we are not interdependent and that what goes on in one part of the world, effects us All! Barack generated a lot of powerful and healing energy throughout the world during his trip abroad and especially in his speech in Germany. We must not loose it because critics say he is not yet President. However, he is a servant of the world, and because he loves America and Peace, these things had to be said to stimulate the vision that we can have peace here, right here on earth!
“We who work for peace must not falter. We must continue to pray for peace and to act for peace in whatever way we can, we must continue to speak for peace and to live the way of peace; to inspire others, we must continue to think of peace and to know that peace is possible.” Peace Pilgrim
Posted by: angellight | July 29th, 2008 at 10:43 pm | Report this commentMeeMee makes some good points. I thought I was agreeing with Clive Crook that the politicians elected in America are in part the result of a media generally not focused on illuminating the most important issues of the day.
I must take this moment to commend Brian Williams and NBC News for traveling to Iran to interview Mahmoud Ahmadi-Nejad. All 36 minutes are on-line and I think they are well worth watching.
Posted by: James Canning | July 29th, 2008 at 11:13 pm | Report this commentAngellight,
While Sen. Obama was busy generating healing energy throughout the world, there were at least 5 murders in his Illinois Senate District.
What makes anyone think Sen Obama can “heal” Afghanistan or Iraq, when he has never made a dent in violence in his own district?
http://www.cdobs.com/archive/our-columns/50-new-crimes-in-the-7th-ward-while-sen-obama-was-healing-europe,1442
JBP
Posted by: John Powers | July 30th, 2008 at 2:18 am | Report this commentI write to second algasema’s commendation of John Chuckman of Toronto’s post.
This magisterial analysis of the American political system deserves to be widely read.
I have long thought that it is a greedy, deeply corrupt and morally degenerate society.
Posted by: Ken Beard | July 31st, 2008 at 12:51 am | Report this commentThanks for the billiant comment on Obama and McCain. Let us truly hope America will decide in November on substance and not on image.
Posted by: John F. May | July 31st, 2008 at 11:24 pm | Report this comment