I have a friend who was once the Editor for the New York City desk of the New York Times. As such, he attended the general editors' meetings. He said it was the same thing every election cycle. At the beginning of the cycle the editors said this time we will concentrate on the issues and not the horse race. And, he lamented, every election the Times concentrated on the horse race.
This time I think the reporting has been somewhat better than usual, but only somewhat. The reporting has concentrated on the Republican horse race, on the gaffes, hypocracies, and character flaws of the candidates, and to some extent what they believe (or in the case of the leading candidates purport to believe).
Romney and Gingrich offer excellent examples of why reporters are loathe to concentrate on the issues: experience tells us that candidates tell us what they need to get elected rather than what they will do when they govern. So how are we to know what candidates will do if they win. My advice: follow the money. The media is even doing a better job here. we know that Romney is getting a lot of money from hedge funds and the financial sector including Goldman Sachs because of media reporting. The next step is rarely taken by the media. Why is Goldman Sachs giving money to Romney? What do they want? And why do they fear Gingrich? In this circumstance, part of the financial industries' motivation is obvious. Glass Steagall comes to mind. But what else do they want.
Who is giving money to Obama and what do they want. If we are to know more how a President will try to govern, as I say, we need to follow the money.
Comments