Wednesday, September 20, 2000

By DAVE HAMRICK
Editor-at-large

Got the e-mail list of Bush-isms.

It's very similar to the list of Gore-isms that surfaced a few months ago.

Bush and Gore have both made a lot of statements that, if taken out of context and analyzed, make them look like total morons.

Guess what... so would you if you spent 12 hours a day making speeches and answering a hail of questions from reporters and attendees at public forums. Pick a subject and try talking into a microphone off the cuff for 30 minutes let alone 12 hours then print out everything you said and take a look at it. You'll think Forest Gump was a genius.

But there is a difference between the Bush-isms and the Gore-isms. The Bush-isms will be repeated more often, will be talked about and written about by columnists and commentators far more, and will be taken far more seriously than the Gore-isms.

For some reason, conservatives tend to balk at using tactics like trying to make a candidate look like an idiot by taking isolated bits out of thousands of hours of tape, and then running a campaign based on the premise that "My opponent is dumber than me."

And conservatives in the press me and the other guy also tend not to press that pedal too much.

Anytime I get close to the subject of the liberal bias in the media, my liberal friends use the same argument, which consists of repeating the words "Yeah, it's that liberal media bias" in a sarcastic tone of voice as if treating facts with sarcasm will somehow erase them.

Don't pin me with the "conspiracy theorist" label, though. I don't think there's anything other than basic human nature behind what's happening.

It's an established fact that about 70 percent of the people who work for newspapers, magazines, radio and television stations are liberal. And the liberal philosophy, at its very core, is opposed to the idea of rules and standards.

In journalism training, we are taught to set aside our biases and work diligently for that exalted state known as objectivity. The more we disagree with someone's point of view, the harder we are supposed to work to present that point of view accurately and fairly in reporting on controversy.

Nobody is perfect on that score, least of all yours truly. But nobody tries harder to achieve it.

And don't get me wrong. I know plenty of liberal folks in the media, on the local level, who also do their best to be objective when writing news stories.

But on the national level, the liberal idea surfaces that you should not only report the news but also "explain" it so people know what to think about it. The bias is so obvious you can't miss it unless you just want to. It's like a giant, festering boil on the face of our profession.

Try an experiment. Watch all the news you can on TV for a week. Count the number of times the reporters focus on "mistakes" in the Bush campaign as opposed to simply reporting on the ideas he puts forth in his campaign events, and count the number of times the reporters cover positively the Gore campaign. See how many of them report his "mistakes."

You'll find that Gore does make mistakes. I promise you he does, and if you watch enough TV, you'll find somebody on a midnight recap who will dare to mention one of them. Likewise, you'll find that Bush does do a lot of positive campaigning, but you'll only see a glimpse of it here and there.

You'll see a lot of photo opps of Gore making cute jokes, hugging and kissing his wife, waving and smiling and similar setups. You'll see a lot of video of Bush sitting at awkward angles, having goofy looks on his face, or saying things that sound silly.

You may think that's because Bush spends all his time looking goofy and sitting at awkward angles, but if the reporters were so inclined, the whole situation could be completely reversed.

Bush's campaign seems to be headed downhill, and I'm not by any means saying that he and his staff aren't responsible for that, or that they can't turn it around if they'll learn from their mistakes.

But I am pointing out that biased reporting is a part of the landscape they have to deal with, just like sports teams sometimes have to deal with a less than competent referee.

It's something they're going to have to overcome, in addition to finding ways to get their message out.

The key will be the debates. Gore's tactic will be to come up with some sarcastic one-liners similar to the "You're no Jack Kennedy" line of the Quayle-Bennett debates, and try to make Bush look dumb.

Bush had better bet ready with some good comebacks, along with doing his homework and being able to talk intelligently about the issues.

Or he's a goner.

Back to Opinion Home Page | Back to the top of the page