Spring Break
Letter: Student reflects on media coverage of election, urges others to 'move on'
Issue date: 11/19/08 Section: Editorial/Opinion
11/19/08 - To the Cigar,
After reading the comprehensive letter regarding McCain and the plight of the Republican Party by Frank LiVolsi, I began to reminisce about the elections.
I think this election was important, but not because it was an obvious and pivotal social landmark in American history or the end of George W. Bush's mild debacle.
I think this election showed the American people how ridiculous the media is. In a lot of ways, for me, this election wasn't about the candidates at all. It was about coloring in states on a big map.
I am assuming Rhode Island was colored blue because people here support Smurfs and ocean creatures, like whales.
The election for me really emphasized breakthrough hologram technology as well as giant touch screens that are incredibly awesome.
I remember vividly media overlords, like CNN and MSNBC, during the campaigning months, providing the American public with extensive, exhaustive and seamless coverage. Each professed to be the ultimate reference, the only trusting source, essentially the all-seeing gypsy prophet woman in the tent with the crystal ball.
I enjoy watching CSPAN and CSPAN-2 because of their lack of graphics. They broadcast politics in its most raw and elegant form - blank rooms, and people talking.
The rooms are also usually old. When I see the Senate convening on H.R.5714, I don't want to see little rotating icons, colors or tickers.
Whomever thought marquees of moving text with limited information was a good idea, other than for the stock market or entertainment, was hopelessly wrong.
They are probably well-paid and not looking at tickers anyway. Even the word "ticker" is annoying.
Panels of talking people are important in political coverage. In addition to my dilemma as an American citizen to vote for the individual who would best serve my moral and social interests, I had to choose which panel of people would give me the most reputable and important information.
After reading the comprehensive letter regarding McCain and the plight of the Republican Party by Frank LiVolsi, I began to reminisce about the elections.
I think this election was important, but not because it was an obvious and pivotal social landmark in American history or the end of George W. Bush's mild debacle.
I think this election showed the American people how ridiculous the media is. In a lot of ways, for me, this election wasn't about the candidates at all. It was about coloring in states on a big map.
I am assuming Rhode Island was colored blue because people here support Smurfs and ocean creatures, like whales.
The election for me really emphasized breakthrough hologram technology as well as giant touch screens that are incredibly awesome.
I remember vividly media overlords, like CNN and MSNBC, during the campaigning months, providing the American public with extensive, exhaustive and seamless coverage. Each professed to be the ultimate reference, the only trusting source, essentially the all-seeing gypsy prophet woman in the tent with the crystal ball.
I enjoy watching CSPAN and CSPAN-2 because of their lack of graphics. They broadcast politics in its most raw and elegant form - blank rooms, and people talking.
The rooms are also usually old. When I see the Senate convening on H.R.5714, I don't want to see little rotating icons, colors or tickers.
Whomever thought marquees of moving text with limited information was a good idea, other than for the stock market or entertainment, was hopelessly wrong.
They are probably well-paid and not looking at tickers anyway. Even the word "ticker" is annoying.
Panels of talking people are important in political coverage. In addition to my dilemma as an American citizen to vote for the individual who would best serve my moral and social interests, I had to choose which panel of people would give me the most reputable and important information.
