Ignorance May Be Bliss, But It's Really Kind Of Annoying To Others

Three times at work today, I had conversations with those following the Iseman- McCain story.  The conversations all had the typical earmarks of a poor media inspiring poor knowledge.  'The New York Times had no proof', 'It's a smear campaign', 'Why release the news now unless you're a yellow bellied liberal outfit which hates the nation' ... yada yada.

I take this kinda stuff well in stride.  I rarely talk politics at work, and when I do, I concentrate on instruction, not on ideology.  But the biggest surprises today were the outcomes of all three conversations.  They all ended at approximately the same point.

Coworker:  'I just can't see McCain doing that.'

Me:  'What do you mean, the affair?'

Coworker:  'Well, yeah.'

Me:  'You know he had an affair on his first wife, the mother of his 3 kids, with a rich heiress whose money has financed his political career, right?'

Coworker:  'Really?  Get outa here!  Really?'

Yeah, Really.  In fact, he had several affairs on his first wife, Carol.  None of my coworkers knew.  I'm not certain that they believe me even now.  But John McCain has a history of mixing his desire for tail with his political and financial ambition.  The allegations, which to them seem so much like media contrivance, to me seem like business as usual for Maverick McCain.

In fairness, 2 of my working peers did ask me,

'Why haven't I learned any of this from the media?'

Understanding that that query has several answers, I can say this ... You know, that's a damn fine question.

Comments

[Mark Tokarski]

One would have to undertake a serious analysis of the media's structure to understand its output. One would ask questions like "Who owns you", "Who provides you with stories", "Who advertises on your shows" - ownership, advertising and access to public officials has a lot to do with what stories make news. Reporter bias, the usual fallback answer of the right wing, has very little to do with it.