The Objective Primate Problem

by Will Wilkinson on February 4, 2009

In case you forgot, here’s what objective political news analysis looks like. Shockingly straightforward! I think the problem with the American media is that it’s full of Americans who overestimate the importance of American micro-politics, and so, consciously or subconsciously, undertake every damn story as a public-opinion-shaping framing our counter-framing exercise and eventually forget how to report the obvious interpretation of events. This isn’t willful. The obvious interpretation of events has simply become invisible to their team-spirited minds. This is not to say that there isn’t, at the the same time, a very strong sense of the professional obligation to be “objective,” but that tends to manifest itself as pretending to take the other team’s talking points seriously, which is really not at all what objectivity requires.

skin care

Inspiring post i hve seen..The post got positive comments so far and am too thumbs up for this article..

skink air

Obviously you are not a robot, "skin care." BTW I followed your link and it made me want to engage in LESS skin care. Way to accomplish your goals! Assuming robots have goals!

Bai Ben-nu

Yeah, that was penetrating. "the first reason it's a loss is because... he lost." Deep, indeed.
More to the point, isn't the whole notion of tallying up these micro "wins" and "defeats," whether done by a partisan American or a journo Canadian, all of a piece? Doesn't seem too different to me at all. I guess if your realm of debate ranges all the way from CNN and Fox to the far reaches of the FT, then yeah, wow, mind-blowing, bracing critique.

It's like someone who lives on porridge being wowed by oatmeal.

Will Wilkinson

I guess it's contextual. I had been watching cable news, which was hysterical and full of spin and counter-spin and meta-spin. In comparison, the blase, straightforward commentary by what seems like a not-very-invested non-American (turns out she's Canadian) in this segment seemed refreshing. It is noteworthy in its plainness.

Miles

Lighthouse's first paragraph seems pretty on-target to me.

As far as I can tell, there's just about nothing noteworthy or insightful in the FT report to which this posting provides a link.

Am I missing something?

Lighthouse

Really? So objective journalism is basically intoning in a serious manner what every body already knows? I keep waiting for her to say something interesting but it was pretty much what I think everyone figured out on their own by listening to the news report. In other words it was meaningless commentary.

I have always assumed that the emptiness of American journalism was a function of having to fill so many column inches or broadcast minutes each and every day rather there was any real news or not. But maybe it is tied more to an attempt to increase ratings. Based on this, objective journalism is boring and pedantic. Not going to sell much soap with that.

Reality Man

The best part is this is all happening in the part of the Obama administration that is chronologically as far away from an election as possible. Nobody is going to be voted out of office over the crime museum. Obama's approval ratings today will have no connection to what happens in the Congressional elections in 2010 or the Presidential election in 2012. All these meta-popularity questions are silly.

Paul Fidalgo

Couldn't agree more, and I say this as a former media researcher for a presidential campaign.

James

Amen, Will. My biggest pet peeve is listening to talking heads go on about how if legislation X is passed, how will it effect political party Y? Who cares! I want to know how it effects me.

Cool Cal

All I know is that whenever I see Peter Schiff interviewed regarding the financial situation or the bailouts, whatever former beauty pageant contestant de jour happens to be sitting across from him inevitably responds, "Well, you just seem to be awfully hung up on all this economic mumbo-jumbo when clearly there are going to be a lot of people out there suffering."

manuelg

> I think the problem with the American media is that it’s full of Americans who overestimate the importance of American micro-politics...

That's not a bug, that's a feature. It attracts a demographic that can be packaged for advertisers: Tribal-warfare junkies with the attention spans of lemurs. Naturally, the different tribes are attracted by different colors of shiny objects...

mk

I agree that viewership goes up when the media focuses on political meta-questions. It turns attention to ideas that everyone can grasp (does this help Obama? Is he in trouble?) The harder, substantive questions may cause more people to tune out.

Political play-by-play reporting is sort of like celebrity play-by-play reporting, but it lets the audience think they're worrying about important issues at the same time. And, they sort of are. But not in a way conducive to doing the right thing.