Monday, December 11, 2006

The Embedded Comic Strips

Rather then serving to provide pertinent high quality information to help inform citizens about their government and its policies, the Media is notorious for covering events in the juiciest, most eye catching fashion even if it means relegating public figures to villain, victims, and superheroes.

In light of recent events, such as the mounting death toll in Iraq, and the escalating clashes between tyrannical regimes in the Middle East and the US, changes in the foreign policy such as military proposals calling for a staged withdrawal from Iraq, and the administration’s willingness to implement more diplomatic tactics in the Middle East are crucial developments. Negotiating with neighboring countries to alleviate the political turmoil in Iraq, the push to rekindle peace talks between Israelis and Palestinians, and pursuing an international conference that would lead to direct talks between Tehran, Damascus and Washington are a few possible outcomes of the new diplomatic approach. However, the political officials who are the potential executers of these changes in foreign policy, and are leading these critical events have received coverage akin to the narration of characters in a comic strip. New potential superheroes with names like “James Baker” and “Lee Hamilton” with rescue squads dubbed the “Iraq Study Group” have seemed to emerge. Bush is portrayed as a stubborn animated figure, with his hands around his hips and a sad pouted comical look.


Take a glimpse at the recent headlines such as “Can Bush Find an Exit?”… “Will Bush listen?”…and “So Now What Mr. President”? Time magazine’s tone in describing the situation almost begs to be used as an example. “Of course some people [Bush] don’t like being rescued”. And the visit of the “Baker Hamilton emergency squad” and the “although there will be no lights flashing and sirens wailing” statement. Newsweek has assumed a more “professional” stance, with describing the establishing the recent foreign affairs commission comments, “The President seems to be getting a lot of reality therapy”, and the portraying the event as “the counsel coming” and Bush as “the decider”.

The Media has painted a picture with Bush and the geographical land called Iraq smack in the middle, with all other aspects being secondary. This week’s issue of Newsweek carefully lays out the context of these events, providing extensive detailed analysis of the political repercussions, intertwined schemes and webs of strategies in Washington. It savors upon the unmet expectations: Bush Operation Iraqi Freedom, as a fantasy for a democratic oasis in a parched dessert replaced by a more realistic expectation of some measure of stability in the region. The gossip scoop may be entertaining and even intriguing, but hardly pertinent in discussing the future of such an immensely grave situation as Iraq where people’s lives and jobs are at stake. Many people’s families have been torn asunder through the conflict and the way the media is portraying the imminent departure from Iraq may even be a personal affront to them. Analysis of what Bush is thinking is hardly relevant, but yet much of the situation is being discussed in terms of political strategy.

Bush may be commander and chief, but after he renders his decisions and selects the people for office, the results of his selections should be covered in respect to Iraq, not the political effects on his administration. He should not be the only one on magazine covers. The nine pages or so, out of Newsweek’s December 11th issue that it labels “Iraq” do not do justice to its content. It would only be fair to its readers to clearly distinguish between the juicy scoop behind Bush and the politicians (6 pages) and the actual Iraq and foreign policy coverage (3 pages).
If the Media opts to describe and analyze the differing perspectives, and provide psychological profiles with the people involved, why not describe the people who are actually there and will first hand experience the changes in the course of the war, the ones who will truly benefit or lose. The media can speak from other points of view, such as by offering reflections from Generals, the Pentagon military personnel, Iraqi civilians, the Iraqi police force, because believe it or not, there are people will be more affected by these development more then the President.
However, the media presents these events in a context that makes it difficult for its audience, unless they have a close friend or relative in the actual war, not to remain apathetic. In fact, when the Media takes critical events such as these, and casts an overall comical teasing-like coverage on the whole thing, it exacerbates the widespread political ignorance, cynicism and indifference that Americans have toward their government. The Media presents us with a play by play akin to what you’d expect in a baseball, or perhaps more appropriately one of a poker game as scheming and strategy seem to be a key point in the coverage. But is expecting such a high standard of reporting, where the media actually educates people with pertinent information and doesn’t dress it up with villains and heroes be naïve?

Although the juicy, gossip like headlines, and the hyping up of reality, the emphasizing of irrelevant and interesting facts over the pertinent others and the overall tabloid journalism has marked media coverage for centuries, one must be careful not to render this the immutable reality of news coverage. Rather than being passive consumers of news, and embracing whatever provided with the media situation can be if people rally against its practices. The first step in this is raising people’s awareness, which is why I have benefited not only in the academic realm from Media & Politics 2170, but it has helped me to become a more educated news consumer and a better citizen.

1 comment:

Cranky Doc said...

Nicely done -- and I'm a big fan of carefully modulated outrage!