As much as I hate to raise this issue, since I'm not one that constantly rails against the mainstream media, but this has been festering for a while and with yesterday's ridiculous non-story rehash of the Kentucky Central collapse from more than a decade ago, I think it needs to be said.
Simply, is the media trying to manufacture a closer race so that: 1) they don't look so bad from their constant predictions that polls aren't correct and the race is closer than the consistent 15-20 point margins we've seen for four months, and to a lesser degree 2) so that the race is more interesting for them to cover and more ad revenue flows into their organizations' coffers?
It's so hard to read the absurd story in yesterday's Herald-Leader of a well-reported 15-year-old matter, and the piling-on by other outlets, and not believe this is an effort by media outlets to insert a straw man into the race to try to make it closer.
For months now, a countless number of the state's pundits (mainly the sorts that show-up on Comment on Kentucky) have been telling us that the polls showing Fletcher trailing by 15+ points aren't correct and assured us the race would tighten. Not all of them, but an uncomfortably larger number. This went on for months. Funny thing is the race never has tightened. With less than two months until the election, the polls are remarkably consistent, with Fletcher trailing by an average of 18 points.
The local pundits have been painfully wrong about this race. But this is nothing new, as they have been wrong quite a bit over the past year. Remember how many pooh-poohed the notion that John Yarmuth (D) could defeat Anne Northup (R)? And then how many simply dismissed the notion that Senator McConnell (R) might be vulnerable? And how many told us that Bruce Lunsford (D) was in the driver's seat of the gubernatorial primary because of all the money he could spend?
But it's hard to overlook the fact that so many media outlets are ignoring any reporting of Governor Fletcher's (R) record, while allowing him largely a free-ride to make expanded-gaming his centerpiece (only pressing him when sites like BGR pushed out the clear hypocrisy of his new-found calling), and now re-hashing a 15-year-old matter which to date shows no evidence of anything, beside the fact that it is known that Steve Beshear wasn't involved in the questionable advice at core of this newly-manufactured effort in the first place. But that fact got buried in paragraph six of Alessi's story.
So eager to pile-on to Alessi's hit piece that the Courier-Journal's blog simply re-posted a 14-year-old story yesterday, dropping into a vacuum without any context. Considering how big the Kentucky Central matter was, and given the number of years the story dragged on, doesn't it seem a little suspicious that an individual story or item just gets dropped out of the sky like this?
And though Beshear has been very clear about the desire to have all Kentucky Central documents made available publicly, I thought it was a little reckless that Ronnie Ellis would end today's political column with the following sentence:
If Beshear and his law firm did nothing wrong in the Kentucky Central case, why should they oppose releasing the case files and the secret report?
What was the point of that question except to ignite a controversy that doesn't exist and try to shift the current landslide contest into a more competitive category? Seriously, why would an objective journalist end a piece with such a provocative question that implies a great deal when nothing exists?
Frankly, I've been more than disappointed in the quality and scope of media coverage of this race. To call it lackluster would be an enormous understatement and the blame is widely shared across outlets and geography. It's as though they are looking for something to write about that hasn't been written about during this race, even if they must engage in re-runs of events not germane to the race to make that happen.
But I also believe that some collective ass-covering is going on, since so many of them have made crystal clear that they were smarter than the independent polls out there and that surely this race is a lot closer than the data tells us.
As someone who has managed races for a while, I always chuckled when the media seemed to suggest (through their pontificating) that they understood campaign strategy and tactics and voter behavior better than those of us -- on both sides of the political aisle -- who are well-trained to our jobs. Honestly, they don't. Like any business, the ones who do this for a living know better than those who simply observe, regardless of how smart and intuitive they are. I think you're seeing another instance where the media's collective wisdom falls short.
Shame on them. Kentucky voters deserve a lot better than they're getting and this manufactured Kentucky Central effort is bringing down their profession another notch. Thankfully, there are now other avenues for the public to get information and we're not limited to three networks and a local newspaper.
Recent Comments