Goodbye, Integrity.

Election 2008 is finally over. Congratulations to the victors. That being said, I need to opine about some inconsistencies I’ve noticed over the course of the campaign, but before you dismiss my critiques as John McCain propaganda, I must first state that I voted for Bob Barr--I didn’t have a dog in this Republican/Democrat fight. Having not voted for either contender, I feel liberated to speak openly about the election without my comments immediately disregarded as sour grapes. Let me state that I have no problem with the outcome of this election--the people have spoken; however, my primary bone of contention is with the 4th estate. Watching this election as an outsider, I couldn’t help but notice some glaring differences in this election when compared to the previous two presidential cycles in respect to the tone of mainstream media coverage. I believe the election of 2008 has gone a long way in illustrating the complete void of media integrity.

In both 2000 and 2004 we heard countless stories lamenting the enormous sums of money the candidates had raised throughout the season. We were told how money was dictating the politics of the people. It was this sentiment that led to campaign finance reform under the guise of getting this evil money and its corruptive influence out of Washington. We heard how election after election, victory did not go to the most qualified candidate but rather to the person who raised the most money. We were told that the Presidency was essentially for sale, that our selection of president was less like an election and more like a wholesale auction. The media ran countless stories from this angle implying that because of his edge in fundraising, President Bush essentially bought his admission to the White House. I’m not one to argue any of those points because I believe there is some validity to them, but it’s strange how that message of the corruptive power of money was mysteriously absent from the 2008 dialogue.

We just witnessed the most expensive presidential campaign in human history yet that title doesn’t seem to carry the same negative connotation as when the record was held by President Bush. In this cycle, Barack Obama raised twice as much in this election as George W. Bush did in 2004 yet somehow on this go-round the insane level of spending is not something to lament, but something to celebrate. I’ve seen nothing but laudatory stories praising Barack’s ability to raise funds from previously untapped resources, that people who had never contributed to political campaigns were now becoming involved and contributing. In stark contrast to previous elections, we’re now told that raising enormous sums of money to run a campaign is not corrupt, but rather democratic. Fundraising is even being used as a measure of popular support. The media has run nothing but positive stories extolling the virtue of the president-elect’s fundraising ability and how the filling of his campaign coffers represents nothing short of democracy in action. Strange how perspective changes.

For the past 8 years every single election has been tarnished by claims of “voter irregularities.” The terms “voter suppression” and “minority disenfranchisement” have dominated the media dialogue in the aftermath of every Republican-leaning election. How many disenfranchisement stories have run in this election? Despite the fact that the group ACORN was registering thousands of non-existent voters in states that don’t require identification to vote, listening to the media you’d believe this was the most accurate election in human history. I find it amazing how suddenly reliable our system of voting becomes when the outcome favors the left. In no way am I claiming that Obama didn’t win this election—he certainly did. My point is that the constant unfounded accusations of voter fraud during President Bush’s terms in office successfully undermined his administration. That’s a direct result of media coverage. The media validates bogus claims when they cover them. I have no problem with covering such stories so long as both sides receive equal scrutiny. That being said, rest assured that President Obama will not have the same lingering cloud of doubt marring his tenure.

When it comes to presidential politics, the media does not cover the same events in the same way when the results differ. They have two entirely different templates for different election outcomes. For example, when it comes to supposed voter suppression, in 2000 and 2004 we were told that long lines in primarily poor and minority neighborhoods were the result of a deliberate attempt to deter these particular Americans from casting their votes. Yet in this election, we were told that the long lines in the same neighborhoods were the result of democracy in action. Apparently waiting in long lines this time around wasn’t disenfranchisement, but a measure of popular participation. Despite the fact that the percentage of registered voters turning out to the polls was unchanged from 2004, apparently the media won’t let little things like facts get in the way of a good story. It’s completely dishonest. I just find it odd that for 8 years we haven’t had a single fair election, yet somehow this one was flawless.

As we all know, Barack Obama won the presidential election on November 4th. The next day the Dow Jones industrial average dropped 500 points. This fact went largely unreported. There’s no way to prove this, but I’m relatively certain that had this 5% decline, the largest post-election day stock market decline in American history, occurred in the wake of a John McCain victory the mainstream media would have spun this event as a free-market referendum on the election result, yet on the heels of an Obama victory the story was a complete non-issue. Where was the media? It seems they were too busy participating in the Hyde Park celebration to notice the complete devaluation of our collective nest egg. I guess the reporters were so hopeful for change that no one actually noticed the change in our net worth.

I’ve tried discussing these cynical observations with friends, but they continually tell me that everyone is optimistic on the heels of this Obama victory and that I’m just being a Debbie Downer. This has nothing to do with the election outcome. This has everything to do with the dishonesty of the media. People rely on the media for honest information so that they can make sound decisions. What became evident in this election is how the media uses starkly contrasting templates to frame the information they present. In this respect the media has failed us and in doing so has failed America.