Great Idea

I fully support this:

Let’s have the FCC require that the networks designate their news people with either a  “D” or a little “R”. Some examples: “Katie Couric (D-CBS)”, Wolf Blitzer “D-CNN”, “Keith Olbermann (D-MSNBC), “Chris Mathhews (D-MSNBC), Bill Moyers and Gwen Ifful (D-PBS) and yes, Joe Scarborough (R-MSNBC). Get the idea?

If FOX News is really “fair and balanced” – like they say they are – let’s make them put a “D” or “R” under the person’s picture as he/she talks. I want to know for sure if that feisty Irish guy on the “No Spin Zone” is a Democrat or a Republican – and not, as he alleges, an “independent.”

A caveat: I’m afraid if we let FOX use an “I”, then all the networks would want to use it and we would end up exactly where we are now. So, to keep the system brutally honest – absolutely no “I’s” would be permitted. After all, that’s what they all say they are now.

Also helpful would be short bits of bio information, like: “Stephanopoulos (D-ABC) was Bill Clinton’s press secretary”, “Buchanan (R-MSNBC) ran for president three times, was a speech Writer for Richard Nixon, and communications director for Reagan,” “Matthews (D-MSNBC) was press secretary for former House Speaker Tip O’Neil (D-MA)” and “Mark Shields (D-PBS) worked on several Democratic presidential campaigns”.

In fact, the second point is even better than the first.  The biggest problem?  Mainstream News Media buries the party affiliation of politicians when it is a Democrat Behaving Badly.  How could we expect them to be honest about their own affiliation and biographical data?

But I guess that’s the point here: pass a law that requires the affiliation and biography to be prominently and regularly displayed, and then investigate when commentary and designated affiliation seems to be at odds, i.e., dishonest.

Advertisements

4 Comments

Filed under Politics

4 responses to “Great Idea

  1. Morgan

    I gotta say, I kind of like this as well. But I wonder if instead of (D), (R) and (I), they could use (C)onservative, (M)oderate and (L)iberal, along with the brief, biographical information. Cause it’s hard to say that Joe Scarborough is an (R) in the same way Pat Buchanan is an (R). For that matter, is Buchanan an (R) at all anymore? He’s sounding more like a (L)ibertarian these days.

    How about (Rc) for conservative Republican (like Bill Kristal) or (Rm) for moderate Repuplican (like Joe Scarborough).

    Ok, this is getting confusing…

  2. chiefmuser

    Yeah, the devil is clearly in the details of implentation on this one.

    That’s why I liked the 2nd part, the salient points of a brief bio, best.

    I think that if this could ever get implemented, the best check on it will be their own competitors:

    “CNN says its anchor is a Conservative who once worked for Newt Gingrich. Why won’t they tell you that was only 6 months, and he left to be an ACLU lawyer for the next 10 years? Watch NBC, the honest news channel!”

    The best part about it? If this ever came to fruition, I really think there would be a scramble to find Conservative pundits. Shorn of the fig leaf of (false) objectivity, it would become obvious that on matters of immigration, gun rights, abortion, gay rights, etc, this country is still mostly center-right.

  3. I like the idea too. I was completely lost (this is the first election I have ever participated in), and little things like that would help. Of course it would also help if they had some website like “politics for dummies” that explained the core principles of all the different stuff (from democrat, to conservative). With of course an explanation that you can be ______ but not agree with it all (which was a total point of confusion for me.) Oh, and if they could also add something to let people (I got this one really quick) the difference between a news anchor that is supposed to be unbiased, and a show that admits it is biased.

    🙂

    sorry for the run on sentences, I got a bit exited over this idea…

  4. chiefmuser

    This website is exactly what you want, no?

    …oh, wait, you said “politics for dummies”, not “politics by dummies”. My apologies for mis-reading.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s