With November 4th mere moments away, I really wanted to take a closer look at this idea of “Obama Hype” and see what all the fuss is all about. The deeper I dug, the more I saw, the uglier it got.
Scanning magazine covers, I found at least 20 covers glorifying Obama front and center, hailing him as if he’s already won, forgetting that there’s “John McCain”, who whether or not you favor him, is the other half of this election. John McCain, who despite pan-handled polls, has a very real shot at being the next Commander-in-Chief of the United States of America.
But this reality was shown only by a small number of publications, with fewer still showing BOTH candidates on an equal platform.
Twenty is the number I found for magazines who allowed a cover to be published that showed partiality and prejudice. Their bylines and images evoking memories of dictated regimes where media is the last place for authenticity.
The idea of authenticity and freedom in the realm of journalism, is kindled in the recess of my mind like a far away and almost forgotten fairytale where journalists waged through endless fields of bias and fiction, editors who sailed the widest seas – all in search of that last holy grail that held a morsel of truth, in search of that frontier where free speech could echo from valley to shore.
We all know what journalism is MEANT to be. And most of us realize the incubus it has BECOME, weighing heavily on our chest as it whispers in our ears telling us what to believe, showing us what to see.
There are only a few instances where a notable degree of balanced representation was offered. A few, but not enough if we consider the importance of the decision we’re being asked to make
In other instances, a publication was brave enough to take an original and unscripted stance – fully aware of the public backlash of an unfavorable view. The New Yorker was one such magazine that took a refreshingly bold look at Obama.
Many were offended by this feature cover, but so are the many more of us who are even more greatly offended by main stream media’s consistent display of over the top bias on an issue of such great national (if not global) importance.
Of note, The New Yorker maintains this cover was a satirical look at the misrepresentation used to direct voters away from Obama. But the real joke is how many people are ignoring Barack Hussein Obama’s militant Muslim background. And mass media’s treating the senator as if he’s already our next president – isn’t that misrepresentation on a monumental scale?
The point here isn’t for me to endorse one candidate over another. The point here is, however, to discuss how much our decision is influenced by media.
How is America any different than a dictated regime if our media is parading glorified images of a political figure, hailing him as our savior, not letting us decide, but deciding for us?
Our country loses a bit more of its democratic standing every time the media violates their duty to be a beacon of truth, every time it fails to uphold its duty to accurate representation and manipulates us to see things one way or another.