Posts Tagged ‘Barack Obama’
Hillary Clinton: Absolutely the Right Choice for a Tough Job
Barack Obama is “on track” to nominate Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State, the BBC reported this morning, prompting criticism from a number of commentators.
Times Chief Foreign Commentator Bronwen Maddox, whose work I usually greatly admire, argues in this article that Obama should not appoint Clinton as Secretary of State.
Ms. Maddox admits that Clinton’s experience – particularly her foreign policy experience – mean that she would do a good job as Secretary of State. Moreover, she says that the appointment of Clinton would appease both women and the white working-class voters who backed her, and goes as far as to say that Obama “will need those who wanted Mrs. Clinton.”
However, she believes that Clinton and Obama would not be able to work productively together. She writes: “She wouldn’t flatter him; she wouldn’t really defer to him; she might challenge him.”
But should it be the job of the Secretary of State merely to “flatter” and “defer” to the President?
The best political decisions are reached with the input of competent advisors who are not afraid to question and challenge, rather than from an administration full of yes men. Obama, to his credit, seems to recognize this.
Further criticism of Clinton comes from Gerard Baker in this article. Mr. Baker, like Ms. Maddox, concedes that Clinton is the best-qualified candidate for the job. But he criticizes Clinton for her “unrivalled knack for making politics into very personal theatre.”
This may be the case. But Mr. Baker should recognize that this is in part driven by the media: turning politics into theatre is exactly what his article achieves.
Media Bias in the American presidential election
As Barack Obama cruised to victory in the American presidential election this week, the global news media celebrated the result with headlines such as ‘One Man Changes Entire Nation’ (Daily News, New York), and ‘Historic First; Fulfilment of a Dream’ (The Houston Chronicle).
In the aftermath, the impact of the media on this seminal election deserves some analysis. Were the media merely reflecting public support for Obama or were they, in fact, an important factor in fomenting his support base?
Was coverage of the elections biased?
Whilst I too am thrilled by Obama’s win, and hope that he will be able to deliver on his promise to bring change to America, I think that there could be a small grain of truth in Republican blogs such as this one, which argues that media support for Obama made John McCain’s task all the more difficult. As this study details, coverage of McCain was far less positive than that of Obama in the run up to the election. And, according to award-winning media commentator Evan Thomas, media bias can add 5% on to vote totals.
What is more, and with parallels to the coverage of John F. Kennedy in the 1960 American election, Obama’s celebrity seems – at times – to have overshadowed a more detailed analysis of his policies by the media.
Yet Reuters, on the other hand, claim that media bias was “largely unseen” in the presidential race in this article.
This subject desperately needs to be studied in more detail, because it has a bearing upon the fundamental principle of objectivity in journalism. In the words of foreign correspondent Christine Amanpour, journalistic objectivity means “giving all sides an equal hearing”. Whilst I am pleased about this week’s election result, I am not convinced that the media achieved this in their coverage.
