CSotD: Instant analysis and the contagious nature of stupidity
Skip to comments
Tom Tomorrow, an endangered species, on the recent debates.
But, y'know, not recent enough.
We want the truth and we want it right now, but, if we have to choose, we'll take "right now."
So the consulate in Benghazi is attacked, and the first report is that a mob got out of control, stormed the place and killed the ambassador. But, within hours, the reports begin to address questions about how a spontaneous mob, angered over a hateful minor film hyped by an anti-US commentator, got their hands on relatively sophisticated armaments.
Leftovers from the revolution, or brought in for the occasion?
Within a day or two, the attack begins to be traced back to anti-government forces, and shortly after that, to al Qaeda. Whoever the hell "al Qaeda" is these days, things being a little decentralized in al Qaedaland.
So obviously, the White House was lying. And the delay was part of a cover-up.
Granted, it would be easier to blame it on the shortcomings of instant analysis if the administration didn't have a track record of keeping secrets.
Granted, however, that it would be also nice if the "cover up" people could point to a single time in our history or, hell, in anybody's history that government didn't play some cards close to its vest.
So anyway.
So anyway, there was a debate last Wednesday and, as Tom Tomorrow suggests, Obama went professorial and Romney brought out the glitz.
I watched the debate, and, yes, it did remind me of Al Gore trying earnestly to explain that the economy can't work on the simple platitudes being voiced by George W. Bush, and droning on about lock-boxes.
And John Kerry. And Jimmy Carter.
And anyone who thinks a debate is a forum where you trot out your facts and make logical arguments so that people can see what your political philosophy is and what policies you would enact in order to achieve your goals for the nation.
Don't you people ever learn anything? Are you really just a bunch of pointy-headed college professors who can't park a bicycle straight?
Debates are theater. A little song, a little dance, a little seltzer down Jim Lehrer's pants.
As soon as the debate ended, the instant analysis kicked in: Romney was declared the "winner," Obama the "loser" and the only actual policy proposal that anyone reported on was Romney's off-hand threat to defund the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.
And they didn't actually report on that — they just made Big Bird jokes.
Wanna know something?
The White House was a whole lot quicker in turning around and presenting fresh, more complete analysis on what actually happened in Benghazi than the press has been in presenting fresh, more complete analysis on what actually happened in Denver.
So I'm listening to NPR last night and they're reporting on the polls that show Romney getting a huge surge from voters based on the debate, and one of the pollsters says that this surge comes despite the favorable jobs report that emerged two days after the debate.
As if.
As if polling them two or three or four days later was going to tell us anything about how people felt about the debate itself, rather than about how they felt about the shallow but all-pervasive shower of "Romney won! Obama lost! Big Bird! Big Bird! Game over!" coverage they were subjected to in its aftermath.
I'm reminded of the legendary Kennedy/Nixon debate in which, according to historians, those who heard the debate on radio generally felt Nixon had won, but those who saw it on TV gave the win to Kennedy.
But this wasn't a poll on how they reacted to the debate. If you wanted to know that, you'd have had to ask them before the sample was spoiled by the avalanche of Big Bird coverage.
And now the same people who are furious with the White House for hasty, incomplete reports on Benghazi (but would have screamed "cover up!" if there hadn't been instant reports of some sort) are cheerfully polling people to find out if they believed the instant analysis of the debate.
Which apparently they did.
At least for a little while. Now Gallup says they're headed back the other direction.
"Sigh," says Tom Tomorrow's android Obama, "must we resort to such cheap theatrics?"
Only if you want to win, man. Only if you want to win.
Comments
Comments are closed.