Every four years, the same thing
Look.
I'm a man of a certain age. Like many of us here, I remember a time when I couldn't look at my phone or turn on my computer and find whatever information I wanted. That would involve a trip to the library, the help of a reference librarian, and scouring through books, magazines, and microfilm. It was an effort.
My first presidential election was in 1988. Of course, I voted for Michael Dukakis. (He won California, by the way.) You know how I knew what his policies were? Democrats mailed them to my house. I watched the news. I read the newspapers. Again, it was work.
Every four years, we get the same question: What does [the Democratic candidate] stand for? What are their positions?
Until I was about thirty years old, that involved a bit of work. Now?
Where does Vice President Kamala Harris stand on the issues? It's right here! I mean, go to her site, click on "Issues", and Bob's your uncle. It couldn't be simpler.
And yet. Every four years. "We don't know where he/she stands on the issues."
This is not a fault of the candidate. This is the fault of the media. This is the fault of citizens who believe everything should be spoon-fed to them.
The same media which has spent the past month cavilling that it doesn't know what Vice President Harris stands for could very simply look up her campaign website. And I'm sure they have. But what they want is for Mrs. Harris to sit down with Very Important Reporters and submit to a forensic analysis of her policy positions. A sit down it doesn't even pretend to demand of her opponent. And, of course, by "forensic analysis", I mean that they will basically ask her why her proposals are unworkable and is she lying to the electorate.
As a voter, you have all the information you need at your fingertips to make a decision as to whom to vote for. You don't need to wait for the media. You don't need to wait for your sister. Go to the relevant websites, compare and contrast, and there you go. But that's too much for some people. We are an instant gratification world. But more than that, we don't want to do the work for ourselves, even when the work consists of a few clicks and some time reading. One would think that citizens of a free democracy would be able to spend minutes of their lives educating themselves on the relative positions of different candidates. But, alas.
You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it click a link. And, to be frank, those people are not reliable voters, or voters at all. The people who are going to vote have all the information they need, on both sides. Those who bray: "Tell me what you stand for" are the kinds of people who may want to leave the onerous work of self-government to those of us who take our role as citizens more seriously.
I return to the media. It should report on candidates' positions without the need to interview the candidates. Lay out the platforms, provide some analysis, and allow their readers or viewers make their own judgments. But their desire to be the arbiters blinkers them to their role. They are not actors, they are relayers of information. That's what we need in a media. We don't need panels with constant argumentation. We need: "This is what Candidate A says, this is what Candidate B says, this is what analysis from various quarters say, and now you have information." But that doesn't sell ads. When I was growing up, news divisions at the Big Three networks were loss leaders. They were not expected to make money. But with cable news, these are now profit centers. And that does skew coverage, or the type of coverage. You need to keep people tuning in or clicking on your articles. What is a sacred trust under the Constitution is now just another way to make money. And that is to the detriment of democracy.
By the way, in the interests of transparency, here is Donald Trump's issues page. I invite you to compare and contrast. I think you'll see the same thing I see.
***
Like what you're reading? Never miss another post! Get notified via email here.
Want to save democracy? Donate below! All donations go to Kamala.