The article is almost entirely about one candidate and, when reporting financing figures on other candidates, they didn't even bother to call Jamie Eldridge - who, by the way, has raised more funds than at least three other candidates (Donoghue's 325,000 loan to herself doesn't count). Of course, the Globe article, an AP piece, was a Niki Tsongas love fest... and, of course, it was about the horse race instead of actual issues. I'm looking forward to one article in the Globe on the candidates' health care policies, Iraq war differences or environmental positions. Don't worry, I won't hold my breath.
By the way, my blog last night was - to put it mildly - prescient.
PS: I actually like Niki Tsongas, but it's really hard feeling that way when the media has shown a clear and enduring bias during this race. I don't mind pieces that focus on either particular candidates or horse-race issues, but they must be accompanied by even more substantive stories that give a fair look at the myriad candidates. It's not exactly hard to print something on any of their positions: any reporter could whip that up in a day. That's why today's Globe article is such a disgrace - if this is what they're going to print on MA-05, they may as well not print anything at all. After all, they have more serious news to print, like prudes in Vermont.
Posts
4 comments:
ya, i'm not buying your criticism. I know that most people on the blogs have endorsed or started to support jamie, but the interviews with him where you ask "tough" questions?! haha, that's funny. hardly any criticism of his campaign (which by the way, homeboy has a hard time raising money). i swear if a person new to massachusetts got their news from the blogosphere they would think jamie eldridge is the frontrunner. I'm not saying it's bad, if i myself "blogged" (yup..new verb) i would be alllllll over my candidate giving him/her spots daily so to speak. But you can't criticize the globe for covering the likely winner becuase lets face it, the blogosphere is covering the likely loser. And maybe there is somethign to be said for that, you yourself believe in an idea and want to see it realized. The boston globe takes a different view. It's def. not a disgrace, if you are going to throw that word around, then you might have to start spreading the insults to some of the other blogs covering the massachusetts 5th
Anon,
In my blog I said that I thought it was OKAY to focus on particular candidates in certain articles - or the horse race issues. Your criticisms have no base. However, I also think it's important to give relevant news on particular issues - which the Globe hasn't done, whatsoever.
Furthermore, Jamie Eldridge has been raising plenty of cash - he's raised more than three of his competitors, at least. Donoghue has more money, but that's because of a 325,000 personal loan. The only candidates who've raised more money are Finegold and Tsongas.
However, raising the most money doth not equate to victory - and nor should it. We ought to have a government run by who the people support, not the special interests. Deval's campaign was all about that and - note - two candidates spent more in the race than he did, yet he still won (by a wide margin).
Finally, the media is a service for the people. It ought to be out there educating them. Yes, stories on the horse race sell, but so will articles on health care, etc. It doesn't shock me that they'd spend articles focusing on Niki Tsongas, but they ought to have articles explaining every candidates issues in addition to their biweekly Tsongas love fest.
PS: Did you actually listen to our podcast with Jamie? I gaurantee you we asked some questions that were tougher than most of them face at debates. We asked him to be specific, too, and he was.
Well, as another of the Left Ahead! talking heads, I concur that the podcast was somewhat of a love fest. For those who read our individual blogs, they know that you, Lynne and I independently came to the conclusion that Jamie clearly differentiated himself as the progressive candidate. He remains on the leftmost, taking a big risk by doing so. Yet, if voters want a continuation of Meehan's goals and improvements on them, Jamie's the guy.
Understandably, as presumptive winner from pre-announcement times, Niki has played it safe. I'm not so sure though in this short race that we can accept the premise in today's Phoenix that she might go the way of Tom Reilly and other such mealy-mouthed, moneyed candidates running against progressives in today's culture.
(Blogger doesn't seem to like the direct link to this. It's "The Million Dollar Widow" lead on the news section.)
We did ask Jamie stuff no one else had and largely still have not. I'm not sure others are as keen on the differentiating issues as we. On my own blog, I continue to wonder whether voters will go for a name with few changes or for promises and plans to better their lives. That's always a tough decision for many.
Post a Comment