Reporters are not my representatives

In a bit of temper about media 'access,' a Time.com employee noted his feeling that reporters are the equivalent of voters, ie without them, the public (voters) wouldn't know what to think:

• (From Time.com): "More importantly, in her smug dismissal of the media's role in asking questions of the candidates, Wallace was really showing contempt not for reporters, but for voters....It's important to them to know if Palin can handle herself in an environment that isn't controlled and sanitized by campaign image makers and message mavens."...

The reporter wants to be the one to 'define the daily discourse,' and I say absolutely not.There is a basic misunderstanding in the world of reporting, be it baseball or news in general. Reporters do not represent me. I did not elect any of them, nor did anyone else. They and their employers may believe, among other things, that their purpose is purely to elicit truth and relay it to the masses. And that the public would not know what to think without them. This is false. I will decide what I need to know, thank you.

• You do not get to appoint yourself to that job.

• If I seek out information about which you have written, I'll decide if it's important or not.

• Usually, it will have nothing to do with any "questions" you may have asked at an event. In many cases, the so-called questions are more about getting attention for the reporter.

• It would be better if many reporters chose another line of work.

The Time reporter speaks disdainfully of "image makers" and "message mavens." Reporters somehow believe making images and deciding messages (ie defining the daily discourse, ESPN) is mostly up to them. This is the tail wagging the dog.

• UPDATE, 9/05/08: An example of a reporter trying to convey an image with disastrous results:

FRONT PAGE CORRECTION FROM THE NY TIMES:

• "September 5, 2008, CORRECTIONS FOR THE RECORD

Front Page

• An article on Tuesday about concerns over Senator John McCain’s background check of Gov. Sarah Palin of Alaska, his choice of running mate, misstated the history of her political party affiliation. As The Times has since reported, she has been a registered Republican since 1982;
• she was not for a couple of years in the 1990s a member of the Alaskan Independence Party, which advocates a vote on whether her state should secede. (Go to Article)"

Tweet Stumbleupon StumbleUpon