New info from Pew

Hi all: As you are enjoying leisurely strolls by the Kaw, reading the latest political comm thriller on the lawn near Potter, or dreaming endlessly of thrilling election-related research in the fall under the shade tree near Watson, check out the following interesting info from the Pew folks. The media clearly has a megaphone and a bully-pulpit... how they influence the primaries and the fall race are perhaps easiest to detect from hindsight, although Pew gives us strong implications about what we can expect if we think through it. The question becomes, how will the candidates overcome them... or manage them... or, if they are lucky, strategically influence them? These are very interesting summaries -- I encourage you to read them all.

Dr. B.

http://pewresearch.org/pubs/853/mccain-obama-negatives

http://pewresearch.org/pubs/854/candidate-character

http://pewresearch.org/pubs/850/mccain-media-coverage

http://pewresearch.org/pubs/851/public-focused-on-obama

Jon Stewart on Crossfire

Here is the video. The president of CNN actually credited this interview with the decision to cancel crossfire (more or less, I mean, lets not split hairs here). He said
"Mr. Klein specifically cited the criticism that the comedian Jon Stewart leveled at "Crossfire" when he was a guest on the program during the presidential campaign. Mr. Stewart said that ranting partisan political shows on cable were "hurting America."
Mr. Klein said last night, "I agree wholeheartedly with Jon Stewart's overall premise." He said he believed that especially after the terror attacks on 9/11, viewers are interested in information, not opinion." Here is the New York Times link to the article about it. To give credit where it is due, I found the NYT article on this blog: http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20050106-4509.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/06/business/media/06crossfire.html?_r=1&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&adxnnlx=1210481169-wq5tWB4qWRuZFUGeXPMpnA

If you watch the whole thing you will want to listen for the following:
One, Tucker Carlson says at some point (though hard to hear because he is interrupting) that Jon Stewart should teach at a journalism school.

Two, after repeated assertions that Stewart was too easy on Kerry, he says something about "my show comes on after talking puppets making crank phone calls."

Three, if you stick it out till the end, he calls Tucker Carlson a dick.

Get a load of this ad--like the DNC one but meaner

Hillary on O'Reilly...

I have to admit that while I'm not surprised that the interview was pretty "scripted" (meaning safe, pre-arranged, non-controversial, etc.), I thought FOR SURE that there would have been more fireworks. O'Reilly and Hillary both agreed that she needs to be (and is somewhat expressing through the campaign and in being on O'Reilly's show) tough, and she did pretty well defending her positions on taxes and health care, especially. I did love how after the interview, 2 "key" things happened: 1) two "Obama fans" (who were also female) had the opportunity to react right after the interview on the first day, while the "tough discussion" (or important work) was left for later with one-on-one interviews with Dick Morris and Dennis Miller. It's almost as if O'Reilly (or the producers) were hinting, "that's nice that you ladies have a few minutes worth of smiley comments to make, but move over so that the men can get down to the real issues! Grrrrr!" This was followed up later with BIll O'Reilly trying to rebuild his machismo with Miller, as he's trying to assert that he did, indeed, ask HRC the "tough questions." OY!

Did anyone watch the Dick Morris interview later in the show on the first day of the interview? He was saying something to the effect that Hillary has moved from attracting her core of "feminist and abortion voters" to attracting voters who "don't like Obama because of Wright." Comments? I find Dick Morris to be a near-sighted moron who probably sided with Falwell who thought that lesbians, working mothers, and feminists were the cause of 9/11, but who can tell these days...

Sorry for the pithy-ness--I had to watch O'Reilly for two hours over the past two days...wah!

2nd Ad by Dems

Here is the new ad... Dr. B was right on about McCain being associated with Bush, and we didn't even have to wait for Hillary to win the nomination. Check out the picture at the end of the ad... they look like best buds!

Really Harsh Attack ad on Obama

Baym, G. (2007). Representation and the Politics of Play: Stephen Colbert's Better Know a District. Political Communication, 24(4), 359-376.

"the segment interjects a measure of political content into a late-night landscape generally characterized by banal entertainment, while offering rank-in-file representatives an alternative televisual venue in which to craft affective ties with a constituency that pays less and less attention to traditional forms of political communication."

" it represents politics as a form of postmodern play, manipulating elements of the real to create a spectacle that calls into question the very logic of representation. Ultimately, though, this study argues that as parody, Better Know a District indulges in the techniques of postmodern spectacle as a way of critically confronting the "aesthetic totalitarianism" of right-wing political communication that privileges affective spectacle over rational argument and actively seeks to undermine the deliberative process."

This is a highlight clip shown on MSNBC that should give you a sense of the ridiculous antics of the show.


This is a HIlarious interview with the representative from DC



This is an example of a full clip with the district profile and all


Here is a link to a site that has all of the better know a district clips.

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Colbert_Report

I think it is hours of entertainment. I can't believe that these interviews happen.
As an academic question related to the discussion for this week let me ask about the article quoted above.
Do you think this increases political knowledge? If so, I'm a bit terrified about what our kids think about the congress.
Do you think this is a satire that parodies the status quo dominance of a rhetorical flourish over rational argument?
That would be awesome if it did either of these things. One thing it certainly does is crack me up.