All The World's A Stage
From a post at Open Left:
Some pundits...have pointed to Hillary's "magic moment" in her last debate answer last night and to the standing ovation she received. But I was there. The standing ovation was for both candidates. In fact, a CNN stage manager was waving his arms for the audience to stand, signaling the debate was over. [Emphasis mine.]
It's a stark reminder that a politics like ours, completely played out in the media, has nothing to do with the issues, or policy, or anything rational or intellectual.
It's a game. A charade. A mediated spectacle that only allows us to see what the media's lens chooses to show us.
It's a reminder of how little control we have over the process. Especially bloggers, like the bloggers here, who all post so passionately about the very sureness of their position: The Cult of Obama! The Experience of Hillary!
And that's fine. Let it out. Blog it out.
But let's not fool ourselves into thinking that we bloggers have any real significance, that a blogger is more politically powerful than a CNN stage manager waving his hands.
That, my friends, is power.
Argh. F*&king formatting...
Preview button? Soon?
Please?
February 22, 2008 3:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
There should be some kind of port for FCKEditor. There's a plug-in already for the back-end. With MT such a visually oriented system, you'd think the community software would come with some kind of Rich-Text or WYSIWYG editor.
February 22, 2008 6:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
I wish I could recommend this post. But, alas, my recommendations don't stick.
Yet another technical problem for those of us who already had accounts here.
February 22, 2008 3:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'll accept your recommend-in-spirit. A virtual recommend, so to speak.
Thank you, I appreciate it.
February 22, 2008 3:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
I recommended it for you, and the next time the server boots me off and I log in, I'll recommend it for me.
So some folks can't recommend, and others like me, can recommend a lot.
Not that I do that...
February 22, 2008 6:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
I apparently can continually recommend, too. Or at least it seems like I can.
Not that I do...ok, once or twice I did, just to test it.
Now that I know I have this incredible power TPM Cafe has bestowed upon me, I use it judiciously.
February 22, 2008 6:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Of course.
I always knew you were a force for good.
February 22, 2008 7:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks, cscs, for this info. Reminds me of the
"Dean scream" - a function of the kind of recording equipment, which blacked out the cheering crowd over which Dean was trying to communicate, so that only his voice came through - and not the cheering crowd in the background.
Here, you have the "spin" that the crowd stood for Hillary, rather than as a signal of the end of the debate, cued by the tv folks, who needed a cheering crowd and a standing ovation.
You titled this well, cscs.
What a commentary on our society though!
February 22, 2008 3:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
OK, I'll admit it -- I plagiarized the title!
:-)
February 22, 2008 3:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well done! ♪♪♪
And I copied those notes!
February 22, 2008 4:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Even worse, I believe Gov. Patrick used this same phrase in a high school play he appeared in:)
February 22, 2008 8:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think bloggers are becoming a more and more important part of the national dialogue--in a way that politicians have to answer for.
In fact, I believe there's a big movement away from MSM.
Television has lost its grip on being the sole proprietor of news.
I believe the networks are fading fast.
Newspapers and news magazines are fading too. It's their own fault. They've been largely absent the last 8 years when it comes to investigative journalism.
I don't think either of those mediums are responsible for the immense turnout of younger voters across the country.
Yes, politics is a show.
But bloggers help generate a demand for different actors.
February 22, 2008 4:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Television has lost its grip on being the sole proprietor of news. I believe the networks are fading fast.
Not so fast.
TV Nightly News Ratings:
Daily Kos site visits:
Average Per Day 1,052,070
So, this is obviously not an apples-to-apples comparison. And while it's only one web site, Daily Kos is the largest.
But I don't see a "big movement" away from traditional media. And, of course, bloggers need traditional media, otherwise they'd have nothing to write about!
I would not dispute that the blogosphere has helped shift some of the power around when it comes to politics and media. And sites like TPM and Daily Kos and Open Left are doing something special.
But I think it's not wise to pretend the traditional media -- especially television -- doesn't matter anymore.
Where did you watch the debate?
CNN (and NBC, etc) has a lot to do with shaping what happens in politics, even if a lot more people aren't turning to these outlets as their primary sources of information.
February 22, 2008 4:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
By the way, I should state, I am assuming the TV "total viewers" is different people, totaled for the week. The Daily Kos numbers, that's an average of total "readers," but I don't think you can take 7 days of that and conclude it's 7 million people.
I think there's about 1 million people that read Daily Kos, and about 25 million people watching the Nightly News.
That's how I read those numbers...I would be interested in other opinions on how to interpret them.
February 22, 2008 5:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
actually, I think the numbers you posted sort of made gary's point. it's been a pretty short period of time for the orange satan to have picked up as many daily visitors as one network has news viewers.
wonder how many daily comments on that site?
February 22, 2008 9:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, it's more like 1/5 of the viewers compared to TV news. But there's no doubt 1 million site visits per day is impressive and significant.
February 22, 2008 11:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Of course there are more tv viewers than blog readers. But i think there's absolutely a case to be made about the rising effectiveness for blogs to both cover news the MSM doesn't, and inform and sometimes change the national conversation in a way passive tv viewers can't.
The print medium is struggling: advertising trendlines for newspapers are plummeting while advertising trendlines for the internet are soaring. That is not disputable.
As far as television being the sole proprietor of news, they have, in fact, lost their grip. Keep in mind I said the "sole proprietor".
It means that there are an immense number of alternatives. In time, television and the internet will combine to create one medium. And MSM as we know it will never be the same
Here are a few numbers from a Pew Research report in 2006:
Television:
Evening News Broadcasts
Television is Americans' favorite news source. But the popularity of the nightly network news has plummeted in the past decade. In 1993, 60 percent of Americans reported that they regularly watched the CBS, ABC or NBC evening news -- today it's 28 percent. And only 9 percent of people under 30 tune in to the networks' nightly newscasts. Despite the highly-publicized ratings wars, the three big networks' news broadcasts were almost tied when Americans reported to Pew what they regularly watch: 15 percent watch NBC Nightly News, 14 percent watch ABC World News Tonight, and 13 percent watch the CBS Evening News. Five percent watch The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer.
News Magazines
As of November 2005, according to Nielsen Media Research, the networks' primetime news magazines were attracting audiences ranging in size from 3.9 million for Nightline to 15 million for 60 Minutes11. More recently, Dateline's "To Catch a Predator" pedophile stings have attracted audiences of 7 to 10 million.12 In its most recent season, by Nielsen's measures, FRONTLINE premieres have reached between 3 million and 11 million viewers.13
Cable News
CNN and Fox News lead the pack among the cable news networks: 23 percent regularly watch Fox and 22 percent regularly watch CNN, down from the early '90s, when 35 percent of Americans reported regularly watching CNN. MSNBC and CNBC each regularly attract 11 percent of the public.
Local News
Local television news remains the most commonly watched TV news among Americans, but measuring trends across such a diverse category proves challenging. In general, local channels are experiencing a decline in viewership for their morning and early evening news broadcasts. The late-night local news, however, has seen on average a slight increase in ratings in recent years.14
February 22, 2008 6:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think what we're both saying is correct, in our own ways.
I don't dispute what you're saying. People are finding more alternative sources of information. And sources like blogs not only are informing, but are having an impact on the coverage, and the spin, and the arguments.
Newsweek right now is covering a story about how the press loves McCain -- I doubt we would have seen that kind of story even a few years ago.
But the media's diminishing viewership numbers don't paint the whole picture.
First, because what blogs are commenting on, in I'd say the majority of the cases, is the media itself. That is, without the news media, the blogs wouldn't exist. They are parasitic in that respect. (Original reporting from TPM notwithstanding, but that's a blip in the amount of news generated.)
Next, as I said, or at least tried to say, is the traditional news media -- television especially -- still has an incredible hold over how the news is formed and shaped.
Lastly, keep in mind that most people aren't reading blogs. To the extent that, like the Newsweek story, the blogosphere actually shapes traditional news media coverage, that's where the influence happens.
In other words, just because all of us in the blogosphere know that John McCain is full of crap doesn't mean that it's conventional wisdom across society. Far from it.
And just because people are watching/reading news less, that doesn't mean they're all flocking to blogs.
They could just be playing Halo.
February 22, 2008 6:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
cscs,
How do I do a post? I can reply to others. I can recommend but I can't figure out how to do a post here anymore.
February 22, 2008 6:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
So as soon as I say that I figure it out. See my post about the secret service ordering the police to stop a gun check at an Obama rally in Dallas, which should be going up at Election Central shortly (I hope).
February 22, 2008 6:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
At the top of the page, do you see the Search box?
Under the Search box, you'll see:
Your Blog (Blog Now!)
Click on "Blog Now!" to be taken to the editor. The "Your Blog" and "Blog Now!" are two different links.
February 22, 2008 6:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, that's certainly interesting. I posted the above reply to your previous comment, but it stuck to this one instead.
February 22, 2008 6:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
haha. Glad you figured it out.
Anything else I can help with?
:-)
February 22, 2008 6:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Loved the post and the 'moral' of the story, cscs.
I think you and tpmgary are on the right tracks. I have some recent Internet numbers from Pew to add along with my 2 pennies and a different view from the same building as you two.
The Internet Gains in Politics
So, the numbers aren't there on how many are going to CNN Online or blogs for their information, or both. And the point about how blogs needing the MSM is critical to understanding whatever it is we're trying to understand. :-)
I'm not sure that it's correct that blogs have changed the national conversation, at least not yet, anyway. What they have done, though, is created more spaces and more opportunities for more people to engage in the conversation.
They have also offered a grassroots path of sorts to candidates by offering them more spaces and ways to get out their messages and collect contributions from donors. And I think most people agree that Democrats have by far ruled the web roost in all of these regards. My favorite conservative quote that had redstate.com seeing deep shades of red:
My guess is that Linder was talking influential on current and wanna be legislators and not so much on the national conversation. But maybe it's possible that at least for Democrat's (snark) voices, they are closer to the beltway now than the wilderness, the citizen's traditional home.
February 22, 2008 8:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks, seashell.
I guess one way of thinking about this issue is, what events were important in the campaign so far, and "where" did they take place?
The debates fueled much of the conversation -- that's all from television. Completely staged and contrived events.
The McCain story? The Times. Not bloggers.
I'm simply advocating some perspective here, recognizing the power the old media still have. Not to discount what's emerging in the blogosphere, but just trying to keep it in perspective.
February 22, 2008 10:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Geez, I thought I was agreeing with you, but acknowledging the community spaces, too.
Old times yet? :-)
February 22, 2008 10:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wow, cscs, a pretty long thread here. Almost like old times!
♪♪♪
February 22, 2008 9:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
You are so right, as usual, TheraP.
By the way, your name was taken in vain over on Berube's post (that has already fallen from the front page) today. Don't worry - in this case it's a 'badge of honor'. I've been trying to head to Eric's for about 2 hours now, and still haven't made it. Later!
February 22, 2008 9:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
I need a few more people disagreeing with me. Then, it will feel like old times.
:-)
February 22, 2008 10:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sez you.
February 23, 2008 9:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
At this point the party’s over and the guests are gone; but I can still tack a note on the door.
A disagreement?
For starters the Polk people seem to think very highly of these very environs.
There can be expected to be a lot of overlap between the news magazines and the web news matrix. The cross-pollination and consequent growing supply of substance can only increase.
The diversity and depth of resources on the web indisputably enriches and grounds a vast multitude of discussions.
The young electorate are enhancing the prestige and power of the net, by sheer force of numbers, and the rest of the culture is impressed and eager to catch up.
Corruption is everywhere and has a tendency to take over. But now, with corruption at an awful peak, the web is serving as a crucial tool for puncturing the abscess, and mirabilé dictu, via the power of the grassroots via the power of the web, we have a candidate who promises more reason for hope (yes, hope) than any sane person would have judged reasonable a short time ago.
Given to extremity as I am, I don’t think this country has seen such a candidate since 1860. We’ve been waiting a long time.
Quelle crux, and the web is crucial.
QED?
PS: note the gentleman from Georgia was saving his scorn and assessment of worthlessness for his co-belligerents in the blovosphere. Fun.
February 23, 2008 4:49 AM | Reply | Permalink
There can be expected to be a lot of overlap between the news magazines and the web news matrix. The cross-pollination and consequent growing supply of substance can only increase.
The diversity and depth of resources on the web indisputably enriches and grounds a vast multitude of discussions.
I'm not sure exactly how to respond, as what you're saying is a bit generalized and vague. And maybe I'm being a bit general and vague, too.
But, on the above, I think those are all simply assumptions, that continually need to be questioned and examined. I don't think the outcome of all this is as clear-cut and determined as you seem to think...
February 23, 2008 8:27 AM | Reply | Permalink
Emphatically. Far too enamored of rhetorical flourishes. Played Polonius in a memorable (8hr)
Hamlet; the director said I was Polonius, explaiining I liked to hear myself talk. (He intended a compliment.)
Any confident statements; confessedly speculative. If you think that’s speculative you should see me go on about the dangers of a coprnered executive with a strong deviant streak.
I love good theater. We, most of us, do. What makes good theater is a strong sense of underlying truth, and what makes bad theater is a sense of empty deception. The appearance of a spontaneous standing ovation was deceptive and had a lot in common with cynical manipulation, and that’s disappointing and unworthy. But, we watching believed it, because in fact it was a not-incredible response to a wonderful moment, when it seemed as if we were seeing the promise of a more civilized and graceful politics manifest in a grand moment. We have reason to hope that was not fundamentally false. Obama has already changed the accustomed rules.
Thanks for your thoughtful balance and coutesy.
February 23, 2008 10:35 AM | Reply | Permalink
Geez. Sorry.. Evidently not a master of html tags. Only italics I intended, the single word was.
February 23, 2008 10:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
haha...we won't hold it against you.
And you're not a master of typing, either: coutsey?
I hope you meant courtesy.
Not cutesy.
I haven't been called "cutesy" before. Although it does have a nice ring to it...
:-)
(just kidding about all this...busting chops, please don't take it seriously! I just couldn't resist...)
February 23, 2008 1:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
I disagree with that:)
February 23, 2008 11:15 AM | Reply | Permalink
I disagree...
February 23, 2008 1:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
au contraire...what are we talking about now?
Cutesy has more of a slip and slide than a ring, no?
You read me rightly but understand me wrongly; I can type, sort of. (I just take longer.) It’s my proofing skills that are so obviously deficient.
Thanks for the cutesy and the courtesy.
February 23, 2008 11:55 PM | Reply | Permalink