Debates and Role Playing
Politics have never really been my thing. Up until this year, the election never really held any interest for me. Perhaps this was because that until recently, I wasn’t a United States Citizen. This meant that I couldn’t vote. Hence, my complete disinterest in any and all things political. Plus, I wasn’t old enough to vote anyway. This year, everything changed. I still didn’t really care about politics very much, but the election now holds some interest for me. Then, last week, I watched the most recent of the Presidential debates, and I decided that perhaps politics aren’t so bad after all. This week, I am going to take it a step further. My assignment told me I HAD to monitor three days’ worth of election coverage. Not just that, but I was told to look for specific roles fulfilled by the media, based on Kathleen Hall Jamieson and Paul Waldman’s book “The Press Effect.” Toulmin’s model is the basis for my argument.
My source, CNN.com, did a fairly decent job during my monitoring over the past three days. However, it could have been better. I read a total of eight articles about the election. None of them fell under one of Jamieson and Waldman’s categories of press; they all filled at least two roles. Most of the articles were mainly press as soothsayer, although they also had elements of press as storyteller. These stories told the stories of what had happened, and then switched gears completely to focus on what was going to happen next. The last article focused on what “The Press Effect” calls “press as custodian of fact.” It broke down the race for the White House, changed as it was by the last debate. Honest facts were given both for and against McCain as well as Obama. It used the history of the presidential election to show whether or not McCain and Obama are doing “well” in the race, and whether or not the current polls will hold true.
This last role, the custodian of fact, is perhaps the most difficult and the most important. Jamieson and Waldman describe the custodian of fact as one who corrects factual inaccuracies, defines key terms, gives a sense of history and biography, explores probable impact, and offers analysis, not description. This role is the most difficult because it is incredibly difficult to cover an election without subconsciously using some kind of bias.
It is important to me because as a relatively uniformed voter, I need to know the straight facts, and all of the facts. I don’t need someone sugarcoating the bad stuff and glorifying the good. I also need the honest analysis of what’s going on, not someone who is using selected facts to prove a point.
If I have taken anything out of an assignment, it is that finding a piece of honest, unbiased reporting is very difficult. I will now be on the constant lookout for what I define as “good” reporting-the use of the role of custodian as fact. Not to mention that I am now that much more interested in the election and politics. Hopefully with a few more assignments like this, I will go from indifferent to interested. Hey, you never know.
