Although the 2004 presidential election is nearly 17 months away, the varied outlets of what America has come to know as the mass media have begun paving the long and twisted road for presidential candidates to travel in their bid for residency at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. in 2004.
And the media is paving the Democrat's lane so wide it has plenty of shoulder for democratic presidential doubtful Hillary Clinton and her new book, Living History.
If most Americans took a pop quiz testing for name recognition of declared 2004 presidential candidates from the Democratic Party, it would be hard to find voters who could name all nine, and even harder to find someone who doesn't think Clinton is an official candidate.
She has repeatedly said she will not run in 2004, but has left the door open for 2008.
The first thing to consider when examining the media exposure and focus on democratic candidates up to this point is that around this time in every election cycle, there is a period when party contenders jockey for position. But this election cycle, with nine contenders, the public's need for information about candidates is greater, and the mass media's response has been typical.
On one hand the mass, although pop may be a more descriptive term, media has a pool of candidates who have declared their intention to run for president. On the other hand, there is Clinton, the proverbial dead horse just waiting, and as it turns out more than happy, to be flogged. This has been all for the purpose of selling her book that garnered a frenzy of media coverage earlier this month.
Get content from The Daily Lobo delivered to your inbox
The point of the example is not to criticize the Republicans or the Democrats; it is to bring attention to the fact that the media does not always do its job of providing fair, balanced and crucial information to the public and voters. That information is the very basis of any functional democracy and if Americans do not get that information from mass print and broadcast outlets, where will they get it?
Sure the pop media is not doing its job by informing the public of 2004 presidential wannabes other than George Bush, but it is also the fault of the Democrats for letting the media focus on a party member who has no chance of winning because she is not going to run.
If the "liberal" media cannot even provide balanced coverage of Democratic candidates who will run against Bush, then maybe all Americans should just give up their votes like Floridians did in 2000.
