Some campaign disputes can be tricky to sort out. Others are not. That’s why media coverage that takes the both-sides-have-a-point approach can be so disappointing, if not dangerous.
Take Mitt Romney’s recent claim that the White House was “gutting” the work requirements in the 1996 welfare “reform” law. As a Romney TV ad put it: “Under Obama’s plan, you wouldn’t have to work and wouldn’t have to train for a job. They just send you your welfare check.”
That charge earned a “Pants on Fire” from PolitiFact (8/7/12), which pointed out that the policy change that is supposedly at issue here would grant waivers to some states that are seeking different ways to implement work requirements under the Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) program. But the policy goal of encouraging employment would not change.
Other groups have come to the same conclusion about the dishonesty of the ad. But on the PBS NewsHour (8/9/12), the false ad was cast as a policy disagreement. Instead of examining the claims, the NewsHour just reiterated what each side was saying. As anchor Judy Woodruff put it, “Dueling claims from both presidential campaigns put those subjects in the political arena this week.” Viewers learned that the White House and Bill Clinton say Romney’s not telling the truth, but Romney says otherwise.
And the discussion segment that followed that report failed to offer any clarity at all. Heritage Foundation senior fellow Robert Rector took Romney’s side, arguing that these changes amount to some sort of liberal plan to get rid of welfare reform. Georgetown law professor Peter Edelman–who resigned in protest from the Clinton administration over the welfare plan–said Romney’s attack was false. Since the two did not seem to agree on the basic facts, the discussion must have seemed bewildering to most viewers.
At the top of the segment, Woodruff said, “It’s been many years, even decades, since poverty and, more specifically, welfare has been the center of attention on the national political stage.” That’s certainly true. And coverage like this does little to improve public understanding of those issues.
Usually the only time poor folks make an appearance on “the national political stage”
Is when politicians like Romney
And Clinton
Want to piss on ’em
PBS NewsHour used to be first rate. Now it’s nothing but inside the beltway he-said-she-said. Their current “moderators” have one thing in common: spinelessness.
If PBS would do their job in ferreting out the truth, then they could legitimately refuse to report the mendacious b.s. that politicians lay out for voter consumption. We should not have to consider falsehoods.
They only difference between PBS News and “the others” is the lack advertisements through the hour. Of course they have powerful corporate sponsors and a few of us-99ers listed beforre and following the show.
Otherwise, particularly Ms. Woodruff, the News Hour is the Bland leading the Blind.
Fortunately, BBC precedes the NewsHour and the PBS does report the KIAs, “as they become available with photos, ages, rank and home towns”–never the WIAa or a discussion of the futility of the endless war, its preemptive origin or the cost in trillions plus interest not yet assessed.
“If only the commercial networks would …”
“PBS should …”
The only thing we should realisticaly expect from privatized journalism is … well, reporting that kows to the blood money of the right wing. PBS was never entirely a public entity. I remember even in the early 1970’s watching PBS shows with sponsors like ADM bragging about their “marketplace to the world” or something like that.
We can hope and dream and rue about all this. Or you can tune in at therealnews.com and maybe send THEM $10 if you like what you see. Stop feeding the pigs.
What I would like to listen to is radio that considers balance and fairness to be a matter of presenting the facts (truth) and not just the lies told by both sides. I listen to NP daily and I agree it has become much more like corporate media.
pbs BECOMES INCREASINGLY DISAPPOINTING. It is “he-said” and she-said” especially with Judy Woodruff who usually has her own agenda. When she interviewed two men about the prime minister of Syria leaving the county, she didn’t like what they had to say ans refused to let them continue. They were both making the same point: that the prime minister had little power, had been appointed a short time before, and that Syrians had a history with the US that was guiding their reactions and actions. I guess the official line has to be against Assad at all costs: throw him out but, of course, we don’t participate in regime change or arming Syrian rebels and helping fighters from other countries join to throw out the present dictatorship (Mubarek was fine…but we controlled him._) WHO IS THE PUPPETEER MAKING OUR MIDDLE EAST FOREIGN POLICY AND WHY DO THE PEOPLE OF THE US ALLOW OURSELVES TO BE THE PUPPET?
Unfortunately, to a long term faithful listener, the Newshour has changed from “news” to “views” which, at best, would only lead someone to go looking elsewhere for some reliable source to make sense of any of it. Try the BBC or DW for a broader coverage of the worlds events.
PBS won’t get my money either.
The above is precisely why I no longer give to PBS or NPR.
I’m disgusted with NPR and WBUR, which are now no different than other lame (right wing) media outlets. They have better programming, but they’ve sold out. They no longer value integrity, investigative journalism or truth.
Ditto
Come on be honest.It puts a burr in your saddles when anyone even “listens”to Romney…or me…..or any other conservative.Wait till we start talking about how Obama has stolen a truckload from Medicare,….knows it will be insolvent in 12 years, and has no plan to fix it.God help any news source that reports that.They will be off your xmas card list too.Isn’t this election getting fun?It was reported that Mitt has already begun choosing his transition team.
In 1938, they probably would have reported BOTH the Soviet AND the Nazi views on the division of Poland…
Wow, is Judy Woodruff serious about welfare not taking center stage for decades?
There are many unemployed workers and graduating students who can’t find a job. I guess she missed the parts about Congress not extending unemployment and how many people of all educational levels are on food stamps. She also seems to have missed the part about the House continually wanting to cut the social safety net too.This has been going on since 2008, so what does she mean about decades?
Why is it called the Heritage Foundation anyway? Heritage, as a word, seems to mean more about preserving, and not dismantling things. As for Mr. Romney’s ad, the idea that a “person” wouldn’t have to work or train, seems to be a better fit with those “corporate persons,” like Corning, that paid no taxes and yet wanted a tax break.That seems like the kind of welfare to really worry about.
Although reading the above commentary, my impression is that virtually everyone is not willing to face the fact that almost none of us is willing to accept any kind of change needed to get us out of our fiscal mess, including paying enough to have type of broadcasting PBS & NPR once gave us. Most of all, when getting the views of the Tea Party, we discover the same people who rail against the government for going overboard with the American deficit are absolutely unwilling to budge at all on free health care for the elderly – and I’m telling you this as a person who’s 75. In the end, it boils down to too many of us spending more of our efforts fighting each other than every trying to cooperate and solve a problem. Unfortunately, there has virtually no change on any of this, so the mess will probably continue until the entire USA goes the way of Rome. Why can we no longer think and care about what what we’re doing?
Public TV and radio came as a response to company sponsored news, programing and conservative points of view. First of all, there is a lack of leadership in this country to push a complete change of any existing policy, and therefore, we have the staleness of yesteryear and the fresh, innovative, truth seeking global persons straining for a comprehensive review of how we do business in this century. So when one sees events on the street that don’t jive with the news one reads or sees on Tv, one looks to alternative journalism, or, some do!
Anyway, I found WBAI/Pacifica-FM radio (99.5 fm and streaming) to have valuable programing 24/7 and it is exclusively listener supported. I also support Thirteen with hopes that more people will donate so that less corporations will. I too remember the old days of PBS!
I despise PBS/NPR much more than Fox News. Why? Because with the latter, at least I know I will get no truth. PBS and NPR pretend to be giving the truth, but lean more towards corporate lies more and more. Add to that an ‘arts’ regime that is so upper-class white-driven… uh, no thanks…
ddb9000
Oh boy …before you said “upper class right”.Now it is upper class “white”!Sounds like i know where your coming from(and going to) f there partner.See to me upper class would be the symphony, as apposed to snoop dog.Or ballet as apposed to Britney spears dancing with her line dancers.Or a show on Da vinci as apposed to a kid with spray cans.Or a show on classic books as apposed to twilight.Yes its all art.And I may like it all.But we really don’t need to look down our noses at high art forms do we?Is that inherently racist?
As far as their news….Look it sounds like unless someone tells the news as you want to hear it(from a liberal standpoint)it is not news at all.I think some people hear things out of the liberal grinder and buy into it.They become sold on this propaganda.It basically follows a simple format that looks askance at America and all she does.Soon anything that waves flags and eats apple pie is looked at as addled in the brain.Or simply liars.Anyone who succeeds is the enemy.How we got here is simple.Progressive liberalism with a dash of socialism.It has not been good for the country.It makes people angry and divisive.It breeds class warfare.it is in one word OBAMA.
I used to watch PBS NewsHour religiously and it was a first rate show. But now it’s sold out it’s viewers. Its “moderators” aren’t there to help their viewers understand issues–to ask questions to clarify the issues–to find out the TRUTH of an issue–I’ve given up on PBS!!