In my many journeys around the intertubes,  I have lately seen the Michelle Obama "October surprise video tape" rumor cropping up in more and more comments threads.  Thus, I knew it was only a matter of time before some  newsmonkey picked it up and flung it, poo-like, to an audience eager for more Electiotainment (the surprise hit of the season, I'm told).  I hope that Greg Sargent and Eric Kleefeld are correct, and that the source of the rumor proves fictional.  But I'm hardly surprised that the rumor itself has gained traction.  As I've seen the virtual whispering campaign around Michelle's putative comments grow, I have hoped that nothing would come of this - that this rumor would fall in the "Obama's gay lover" class of rumors.  But after watching the rumors that have  gained traction over these last many months, nothing surprises me anymore. 

As someone who has spent some time researching each "Obama rumor" for myself - from "secret Muslim" to "unrepentant chain smoker," from  Rezko to Wright - I consider myself well-versed in Obama Lore.  I also think I'm quite good at discerning fact from fiction, and I'm pretty good at placing rumors on the spectrum that lies between those poles.  While I am an Obama supporter, I recognize that he is a human being, and a politician, and that with both of those conditions certain baggage comes attached.  This means that some "rumors" will, unfortunately, prove true, just as some will prove to be pure fabrication.  The hard part is predicting which will matter in the overall arc of his campaign.  

That's the part I'm not very good at.  I'm constantly surprised at the things that upset people, and maybe even more surprised at the things that don't upset people.  To me, a "whitey" comment isn't nearly as scandalous as an equivocation on the definition of "torture."  But I am apparently not your average hard-working white American.  So I'm pretty much constantly dumbfounded by, well, everything.

I really didn't think, for example, that "Obama is bestest buddies with terrorist Bill Ayers"would ever gain credible  press attention, because it just seemed like a "no there there" story to me.   I mean, I did a few hours of research using Google and LexisNexis, and I could tell that the NYTimes quotations were taken out of context, that Ayers and Obama were at best tenuously linked, and that there was absolutely basis on which to connect the radical activities of Ayers and associates during the 60's with the professional context in which Ayers and Obama became acquainted.  But I suppose that a few hours of research and a modicum of nuance are too much to ask in addressing a question of newsworthiness, as the "question of Ayers" proved weighty enough for a debate question regardless of its journalistic merit. 

So I can't say that I'm particularly surprised or scandalized that this one has hit the big time.  I am hopeful that there's no actual video, but after the Wright mess I've decided that the best approach is to expect the worst.  When I start seeing a rumor making its rounds, my practice now is to wait a couple of weeks, expecting that it will get covered in the traditional press as a legitimate "question" at some point.  It sucks, but I think we're better off accepting it now, because unfortunately, I think this is what we can expect over the next few months.  And I think the "electiotainment" drive is going to fuel what might ordinarily be "just politics" to keep the scandal-digging machines working overtime. 

These rumors aren't just generated by one political machine attempting to take down the opposing candidate, nor are they simply the reflection of a fringe group of bigots intent on smearing a minority candidate (as if anything about this election could ever be "simple").   These rumors are given room to grow because they are indeed treated like news.   Even when covered "as a rumor," the desire to gain or hold market share in the competitive - and I suppose, increasingly lucrative - world of electiotainment demands that no rumor go unmilled.  The nastier, the better.  If all you have is a story about a story - a rumor of a rumor of the potential for something bad to have possibly been said by someone, sometime, somewhere - then you make a story from the denial of the story.  After all, the networks have 24 hours of "news" programming to fill.

Obama so far seems to be meeting the Electiotainment Rumorters with an attempt to shoot their non-stories down quickly and move the focus back to the issues.  Sometimes this works, but as we've seen, some rumorters will cling to their "stories" till the bitter end.  Now that the primary is over, perhaps we will see a bit more substantive focus on issues amidst the electiotainment coverage, but this latest "rumor" coverage doesn't show a lot of promise.  As I've said more than once recently, I've never entered a summer so eager for a shark attack or a runaway bride to rivet the cable news networks' attention.  Perhaps then, we'll get to have an election.  You know, with candidates and issues and like, debates and stuff.  Wacky. 

In the meantime, I want to know how to address this on a more personal level.  Early on, I took the time to debunk and/or contextualize the rumors and "Obama Lore" that I heard repeated, saw in comments threads, got via email, etc.  But I've gotten jaded now and I typically just ignore that stuff.  I do wonder, though, what other strategies there are besides "ignore," "get pissed," and "explain for the 1000th time."  So I took the time to post this because I hoped that some of you might be able to help me.  I'm too young for total cynicism, and we've got five months left.  What else can we do when faced with the next "**** Whitey," "secret Muslim," or "Obama's neighbor gets her newspaper delivered by the son of a member of Hamas" story?