Memogate – The 2004 case of mainstream media rushing to broadcast a politically biased story and then being accused of not having all of their facts straight by the non-traditionalist bloggers. The story accused President George W. Bush of receiving special treatment during his time in the National Guard. It aired on Sixty Minutes II just months before the 2004 Presidential election. I ignored the so-called “memogate” scandal four years ago, and I would rather continue to ignore it, but since it is the required topic in my journalism class that is not an option.
As a consumer of the news, I find the whole “memo-gate” event completely irritating. Politicians making a big deal of the actions or inactions of members of the opposing party, members of the press rushing stories, everyone having an opinion but no one having any real facts - and in the end what does it matter? My initial reaction to this kind of scandal is to turn off the television and stop reading the paper. I don’t want to hear it. Why should I care if George W. Bush received special treatment while a member of the National Guard? Someone, somewhere is always receiving special treatment. As a figure skating coach, I see it all the time in an effort increase the number of boys competing at the elite level in the sport. We need more male figure skaters to help improve our sport, so rules are stretched and exceptions are made to keep the few boys that we do have skating. Most of them (and most of their parents) know this, and know how to take advantage of their power.
Politics, in my view, is the same way. The rules don’t always apply the same way to politicians as they do to the rest of us. People in powerful positions are there for a reason –they know how to work the system. There is a certain amount of arrogance and self-importance necessary to be a politician. Those are not traits that tend to win you the “nicest person” or “most thoughtful” titles in the high school yearbook, but they may win you the White House. As a voter, I believe that there are skeletons in my candidate’s closet. I think it would be naive to believe otherwise. No one is perfect, least of all someone looking for the power of the Presidency. But I’m still left with the simple question of why should I care about the possibly forged documents provided to CBS? And I’m left with the idea that as a voter I don’t care, but as a student of the media I am intrigued.
Personal and political preferences aside, this is an amazingly interesting case study for a graduate class. The idea that bloggers could tarnish the image a news icon like Dan Rather, and that CBS would rush a story with out verifying facts, and that in the end the story about the story became the story, is all pretty amazing. I find myself wondering how we got to this point. When did the storyteller become the subject of the story? Reporters should be observers, not active participants in the story. A story should not become bigger because journalists didn’t do their jobs right. Government needs journalists to act as bridge between the people and the politicians, and journalists need politicians to help create the news. I think scandals like this one just give both parties a black eye, and cause them to loose the trust of the people.
Now I can't ignore this irritating case any longer. I must learn from it that no journalist and no evidence is above the scrutiny of the public. As I continue my education I will remember that not verifying facts can be deadly to a journalist, and there's always someone out there ready to catch your mistake.
No comments:
Post a Comment