DNC Record Viewership
38 Million viewers watched Barack Obama’s speech last night, a record for a Presidential convention.
The audience estimate of 38.3 million means that Mr. Obama’s speech reached more viewers than the Olympics opening ceremony in Beijing, the final “American Idol” or the Academy Awards this year, the Associated Press notes.
Furthermore, the four-night Democratic convention ranks as the most-watched convention of either party, Democratic or Republican, since Nielsen began measuring conventions in 1960.
As Obama now leads McCain 49-41 in the Gallup Poll, I don’t see how we can’t reach the conclusion that the Establishment Media has been woefully inadequate in their assessment of the Obama campaign. The weeks of hand wringing over the phony Clinton-Obama Feud and the stupid worries about the outdoor stadium setting for the acceptance speech clearly demonstrate that most political reporters are lazy arsed note takers, who have nothing better to do than to spout the talking points of various political operatives with agendas. Even today, Chris Matthews is still giving air time to brain deadenders like PUMApac’s Darragh Murphy. She is so obviously a McCain troll pretending to be a Hillary supporter.
Whatever happened to the days of independent reporting and shoe leather?
Does that number take online viewers into account? I know a number of people watched online, myself include
Does that number take online viewers into account? I know a number of people watched online, myself include
No, that’s just the TV rating.
No, that’s just the TV rating.
I wonder how many folks will bother with the RNC-palooza? I have no intention of giving it any attention. What could be duller than Republicans in full cry?
I wonder how many folks will bother with the RNC-palooza? I have no intention of giving it any attention. What could be duller than Republicans in full cry?
but now they have Sarah Palin to sex it up, figuratively (and literally based on the vulgar comments popping up below articles about her in the Washington Post)
but now they have Sarah Palin to sex it up, figuratively (and literally based on the vulgar comments popping up below articles about her in the Washington Post)
The ability of the press to miss the story actually taking place among the people has been increasing for a long time now, aided by cuts in newsroom resources and a misguided understanding that to be “objective” one has to present both sides as though they had equal validity.
Furthermore those who are experienced begin to perceive themselves as having more expertise in understanding the process than the average voter, to the extent that they allow themselves to become part of the process, thereby abandoning any kind of objectivity at all. Those inside the process all know the photo ops are staged, but there’s a tacit agreement among journalists to pretend they’re not, because good pictures are better than bad pictures. They all know the candidate has to say X because to say Y would embarrass a segment of their base, so they understand X as a reasonable response. People outside the process, outside the club that includes journalists, probably see X quite differently. The outrage on blogs is proof enough of that.
Joan Didion’s landmark essay “Insider Baseball” was the first time I saw the problem nailed down, back in the late 1980s. It’s only become worse since then:
“American reporters “like” covering a presidential campaign (it gets them out on the road, it has balloons, it has music, its is viewed as a big story, one that leads to the respect of one’s peers, to the Sunday shows, to lecture fees and often to Washington), which is one reason why there has developed among those who do it so arresting an enthusiasm for overlooking the contradictions inherent in reporting that which occurs only in order to be reported…
“The Narrative is made up of many such understandings, tacit agreements, small and large, to overlook the observable in the interests of obtaining a dramatic story line.”
The ability of the press to miss the story actually taking place among the people has been increasing for a long time now, aided by cuts in newsroom resources and a misguided understanding that to be “objective” one has to present both sides as though they had equal validity.
Furthermore those who are experienced begin to perceive themselves as having more expertise in understanding the process than the average voter, to the extent that they allow themselves to become part of the process, thereby abandoning any kind of objectivity at all. Those inside the process all know the photo ops are staged, but there’s a tacit agreement among journalists to pretend they’re not, because good pictures are better than bad pictures. They all know the candidate has to say X because to say Y would embarrass a segment of their base, so they understand X as a reasonable response. People outside the process, outside the club that includes journalists, probably see X quite differently. The outrage on blogs is proof enough of that.
Joan Didion’s landmark essay “Insider Baseball” was the first time I saw the problem nailed down, back in the late 1980s. It’s only become worse since then:
“American reporters “like” covering a presidential campaign (it gets them out on the road, it has balloons, it has music, its is viewed as a big story, one that leads to the respect of one’s peers, to the Sunday shows, to lecture fees and often to Washington), which is one reason why there has developed among those who do it so arresting an enthusiasm for overlooking the contradictions inherent in reporting that which occurs only in order to be reported…
“The Narrative is made up of many such understandings, tacit agreements, small and large, to overlook the observable in the interests of obtaining a dramatic story line.”
Rachel-The Didion quote is fabulous. Just shows nothing has changed since the 80′s.
Rachel-The Didion quote is fabulous. Just shows nothing has changed since the 80′s.