I AM JOE. Or: How to make enemies and alienate people

problemboss.com does not review or endorse the advertisers appearing above.

I AM JOE - There's a storm brewing. You see, a lot of people are getting righteously pissed about what they perceive as over-the-top treatment of Joe Wurzelbacher (A.K.A. JOE THE PLUMBER) by members of the press. Media reports have described his tax status, whether or not he's a licensed plumber, and other things that have absolutely no bearing on his question to Barack Obama, or Obama's response.

And I think the anger is justified. What the hell does it matter whether the person asking the the question holds a professional license, or owes back taxes? The question has merit, or it doesn't. I think it does. Obama's answer, including the bit about spreading the wealth around does reveal something about his philosophy and the kinds of policies he would support.

Even if you view this as a tempest in a teapot, we should be more than a little concerned about the implications of Mr. Wurzelbacher's treatment by some members of the press - if you care about participatory government and what happens to ordinary people who speak up and question our candidates and elected officials. In this case, it seems that some in the media are focusing on the person asking the question, rather than the merits of the question and the implications of Obama's response. For the record, I think Obama's response merits discussion.

What does this have to do with management? Perhaps nothing. But it does have a lot to do with leadership and integrity - and ultimately, that's what this site is about.

You see, I sympathize with "Joe the Plumber" -- or at least the idealized "Joe the Plumber" that Mr. Wurzelbacher's question raised. I am most definitely against "spreading the wealth around" via our tax system. Yes, I want to keep what I earn and decide how it is to be spent -- after all, I earned it, didn't I? Voluntary charity is not the same as government redistribution of wealth. I can't understand why the difference is so difficult to understand.

There are those who argue that Mr. Wurzelbacher asked for it, or that John McCain dragged him into this -- that their actions have put him in the media spotlight -- but that doesn't explain the media focus on the questioner rather than the question and the answer.

Much has been made of the MSM's decline -- and this kind of behavior can't help, especially with the widespread perception that the MSM are "in the tank" for Obama. In the political arena, it appears that all notions of press objectivity have been thrown out the window.

Your rating: None Average: 4.3 (3 votes)

Even the Pew Research Center noticed...

Yes, there is a widespread perception that the media are fully behind Obama. Pew also confirms that reporting on McCain is significantly more negative than the reporting on Obama:

Most Voters Say News Media Wants Obama to Win
"Joe the Plumber" a Top Campaign Story

Voters overwhelmingly believe that the media wants Barack Obama to win the presidential election. By a margin of 70%-9%, Americans say most journalists want to see Obama, not John McCain, win on Nov. 4. Another 8% say journalists don't favor either candidate, and 13% say they don't know which candidate most reporters support.

A separate study released Wednesday by the Pew Research Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism looks at the media’s recent campaign coverage and finds that McCain received significantly more negative than positive coverage between the GOP convention and the final debate. The study says that press treatment of Obama has been somewhat more positive than negative, but not markedly so.

Link - Pew Research Center
Winning the Media Campaign - Journalism.org

People can see what's going on. It's not imagined. It's real.

At least one reporter sees the destruction of his profession...

The traditional media is playing a very, very dangerous game. With its readers, with the Constitution, and with its own fate.

The sheer bias in the print and television coverage of this election campaign is not just bewildering, but appalling. And over the last few months I’ve found myself slowly moving from shaking my head at the obvious one-sided reporting, to actually shouting at the screen of my television and my laptop computer.

But worst of all, for the last couple weeks, I’ve begun — for the first time in my adult life — to be embarrassed to admit what I do for a living. A few days ago, when asked by a new acquaintance what I did for a living, I replied that I was “a writer”, because I couldn’t bring myself to admit to a stranger that I’m a journalist.

You need to understand how painful this is for me. I am one of those people who truly bleeds ink when I’m cut. I am a fourth generation newspaperman...

So, when I say I’m deeply ashamed right now to be called a “journalist”, you can imagine just how deep that cuts into my soul.

...

Now, of course, there’s always been bias in the media. Human beings are biased, so the work they do, including reporting, is inevitably colored. Hell, I can show you ten different ways to color variations of the word “said” - muttered, shouted, announced, reluctantly replied, responded, etc. - to influence the way a reader will apprehend exactly the same quote. We all learn that in Reporting 101, or at least in the first few weeks working in a newsroom. But what we are also supposed to learn during that same apprenticeship is to recognize the dangerous power of that technique, and many others, and develop built-in alarms...

...

But nothing, nothing I’ve seen has matched the media bias on display in the current Presidential campaign. Republicans are justifiably foaming at the mouth over the sheer one-sidedness of the press coverage of the two candidates and their running mates. But in the last few days, even Democrats, who have been gloating over the pass - no, make that shameless support - they’ve gotten from the press, are starting to get uncomfortable as they realize that no one wins in the long run when we don’t have a free and fair press. I was one of the first people in the traditional media to call for the firing of Dan Rather - not because of his phony story, but because he refused to admit his mistake - but, bless him, even Gunga Dan thinks the media is one-sided in this election.

...

No, what I object to (and I think most other Americans do as well) is the lack of equivalent hardball coverage of the other side - or worse, actively serving as attack dogs for Senators Obama and Biden. If the current polls are correct, we are about to elect as President of the United States a man who is essentially a cipher, who has left almost no paper trail, seems to have few friends (that at least will talk) and has entire years missing out of his biography. That isn’t Sen. Obama’s fault: his job is to put his best face forward. No, it is the traditional media’s fault, for it alone (unlike the alternative media) has had the resources to cover this story properly, and has systematically refused to do so. Go on, read the rest...

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <h2> <h3> <h4> <h5> <blockquote> <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <br>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

More information about formatting options

CAPTCHA

WAIT!

Please answer this question, so we can figure out if you are a live person or a spambot.