From: streeter@cs.unca.edu (Tom Streeter)
Subject: Re: Chip Switzer
Organization: University of North Carolina at Asheville
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 14:48:52 GMT

In article <1992Sep4.114555.11535@afit.af.mil> jswitzer@afit.af.mil (Chip Switzer) writes:
>jfcowan@cats.ucsc.edu (John F Cowan) writes:
>
>
>>We should all be thankful to Chip Switzer.  This newsgroup was
>>dead as a door nail until he came along. Surely he must be a leftist
>>provacateur. Keep up the good work Chip.
>>JC
>
>Gee, my own name, right there in the subject line!  I have to agree,
>this group was a little dead when I stumbled across it.  I was a 
>little suprised to read one post, though, that suggested this "bias"
>argument should be taken elsewhere and leave alt.news-media to discuss
>the media.  I happen to think it's a pretty important issue in the
>media. 
>

While I'm certainly glad traffic's picked up because of the introduction
of a provacative and interesting topic, I hope we'll be able to use
the momentum gained from that to begin branching off into other areas.
I'd hate to see this turn into a virtual alt.news-media.bias. That's not
to say that thread needs to die or anything, but it might be time to get
something else moving.  I disagree with  some of what Chip says, but I'll
join in the chorus thanking him for *finally* getting this group active.
Keep it up, nothing more boring than a group where everyone agrees (and
nothing worse than one where name-calling is mistaken for cleverness).
I think the heat/light ratio has been pretty good considering the nature
of the topic.  But enough of that........

Someone's asked if there was a discussion of how the Perot phemonomena was 
treated (or created) in various media.  So let  me throw out the first
pitch.....

I think Perot was a creature of CNN.  I don't think it was any accident
that Perot's hardcore support matched CNN's audience demographically.
I'm not suggesting CNN made him run his campaign, or was involved in
some sort of conspiricy -- I think Perot was his own man in those
respects -- but I *do* think that once Perot got rolling on 'Larry
King' there was no way CNN was going to do anything to make him look
bad.  He was gold to them -- they had access to him like no organization
has had to a presidential candidate in decades.  Once CNN started taking
him seriously, the Big Three had to follow along.  Sure he courted the
morning programs, and did late night talk on ABC, but it always seemed
to me that when he wanted to connect with 'his' people (as opposed to
'you people'), it was always on CNN.  The most telling example came at
the end of it all.  That last interview on 'Larry King' was breathlessly
hyped beforehand, and had them nearly gasping for breath as they promo'd
it for a Sunday night re-run.  You'd think they were about to show a
tape of Bush getting off a plane in Paris to pay off some Iranians back
in '80 (or a videotape of Clinton doing the horizontal hokey-pokey with
the Little Rock Jr. High Glee Club) for the importance they ascribed to
the tape.  I watched the show as it first ran on Friday, then spent the
rest of the weekend wondering why the hell they considered it news.
Then -- as I shrieked at a friend of mine's wife who happens to be a
senior political writer for CNN about all of this -- I got the answer.
"Where was the news?" I asked.  "The news was that it was the highest
rated 'Larry King' ever and we got a ton of calls on it." she said.

Oh.

In the final analysis, though, I think the Perot non-candidacy is the
best evidence that there is no one thing called 'The Media' that has
nearly supernatural powers over a cowering and drool-covered electorate.
I'll not explain that -- maybe someone would like to argue it (and
contribute to a new thread?).

Good day.



-- 
Tom Streeter                                |   streeter@cs.unca.edu
Dept. of Mass Communication                 |   704-251-6227
University of North Carolina at Asheville   |   Opinions expressed here are
Asheville, NC 28804                         |   mine alone.
Xref: sparky alt.news-media:985 alt.rush-limbaugh:3956 alt.activism.d:2876