Most of us who write, read. And we read a lot. On any given day, I’ve been known to read many thousands of written words and I do so for several reasons. First; to learn. Sometimes I learn very little, other times I learn a lot. And whenever I feel as though I’ve learned a lot, I research further to verify that new knowledge. Getting perspective from many different angles helps solidify thoughts and opinions that will be included in my own writing.
That’s why I’ve been somewhat surprised over the past couple of years as foreign journalists seem to have taken over the once glorious news reporting job that was formerly the hallmark of the American news media.
Check out this unvarnished news report from Toby Harnden, writing for The Mail Online:
“Barack Obama was swept to the White House in 2008 by a wave of idealism and inspirational campaigning in which he encapsulated the mood of the nation with his slogans of ‘Hope’, ‘Change’ and ‘Yes we can’.
Then, his message was a fundamentally positive one. Americans wanted an end to the Bush era but that almost went without saying. Obama pointed to his own vision of the country; a post-partisan, post-racial America in which gridlock in Washington was ended and common-sense centrist solutions were adopted.
What a difference four years makes. Obama is campaigning ferociously for a second term – and he is a candidate who would have probably have been disdained by the Obama of 2008.
Obama is waging a relentlessly negative campaign of changing the subject from the one that, overwhelmingly, most Americans care about – the economy. Every week there is a new issue his campaign seizes on, preferring to talk about something, anything other than jobs and 8.3 per cent unemployment.
While Obama is still drawing sizable crowds, they are nothing like the size of those who flocked to see him in 2008. In Las Vegas, Obama held a rally in a high school before more than 2,000 people but there was space for plenty more.
On the outskirts of Manchester, New Hampshire on Monday morning, Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan attracted more than 3,000 people who patiently queued in lines across a field to be searched by the Secret Service.
Crowd size is not everything – as Obama himself could attest after losing in the 2008 New Hampshire primary to Hillary Clinton even though he had attracted unprecedented numbers to his events, eclipsing the former First Lady by two or three to one.
But the difference between the numbers Obama is attracting now compared to four years ago should be a cause of deep concern to his campaign.
More significantly, the mood of the crowds is different. There is a sullenness, even resentment, that was not present in 2008. Ask an Obama supporter about their man and as often as not you will get a few words about him and then a demeaning attack on Romney or Ryan.”
We invite you to read the entire piece – and there’s plenty more – by clicking right here.
Think you’d ever read such a report in the New York Times? I think not.
This is clearly a view of the current campaign you won’t get from ANY American news media and that’s a troubling sign. Have we reached the point where this nation’s news media determines the outcome of elections, rather than the voters? Do we have to turn our attention to foreign news media outlets in order to get an honest, unbiased report?
Other than the “New Media”, I believe we have.