Posted on 10/12/2002 10:01:59 AM PDT by forest
"How do you get away with writing about constitutional issues when no one else does?" a conservative patron asked at a small meeting I spoke at last week "This subject is important enough to people. Why doesn't the national media ever mention the way Congress abuses the Constitution?"
Why indeed.
It's not necessarily because they're mostly a bunch of socialists, either. All are not. The answer is actually much simpler than that: It would be a very poor career move.
First, many members of the national press -- the political reporters, anyway -- live in Washington. And most of those are a bunch of party-people. They like to hang out at the good bars, dine at the fancy restaurants and attend all the good functions. Understandably, they want to be seen hobnobbing with the movers and shakers of the nation.
Duty in Washington is the best place for that. Washington is a political town, to be sure. But intermixed with all the political stuff is what seems like a never ending series of cocktail parties. These parties all have free food and drink, which is very attractive to reporters.
Even fund-raisers supply free food and drink for those attending. And all parties have politicians attending -- who, of course, are the very same people the reporters were sent to Washington to cover.
If a reporter writes in opposition to a position taken by a lobbyist, that reporter might not be welcome at the fund-raiser parties that lobbyist throws for politicians. That's usually not a big deal. There are numerous parties going on every week -- usually more than any one reporter could attend.
But, for a reporter to anger the political power structure in Washington is an altogether different problem. That could mean no more socializing with the powers that be. That could mean no more invitations to the power-elite parties. That could mean no more of those little leaks and rumors most politicians and aides like to spread around "off the record" at cocktail parties.
It could also mean that a reporter would have to actually dig to get a story, rather than just "report" verbatim from press conferences and the supplied press releases. That means work.
It's much easier to be friends with elected officials and their staffs. That is what journalism is all about in Washington: repeating the information they are told. Oh sure, some so called "journalists" might actually rewrite a line or two and add an interesting tidbit not offered on a particular press release. But if you read the reports from a number of different Washington reporters attending the same press conference, you will see little or no deviation from the script in the reports.
So, what if the politician is a bold faced liar and crazy as a loon? Obviously, there are a few of them in government. Still, they do not seem to have a problem getting their "spin" printed, no matter how preposterous it may be.
And those Constitutional issues?
Ninety percent of the officials in Washington obviously have no intention of obeying the Constitution. If they did, the federal law books would probably all fit on one shelf. So, how can anybody expect a reporter with a permanent post in Washington and lots of political friends to want to rock that boat?
We can't. And, in a nutshell, that's the problem.
The day to day politics of our nation's Capital is made up of entangling alliances. So there is no surprise to find a synergistic relationship (and more) between politicians and the reporters making up the national press corps. The fact is, they need each other. And simply put, the career needs of both groups are best met when they get along with each other.
The exception to this, of course, is with liberal reporters and Republican politicians. Liberal politicians can be quoted as gospel. Information received from conservatives always needs "balance" from a couple liberals in order to be acceptable to editors.
Of course, the reporter is the more expendable of the two. Most politicians also know the media bosses. So, when reporters don't get along with the political types, they are often transferred or fired.
Consequently, the "approval rating" of most of the national media is only slightly better than that of the Washington politicians they cover. Both are down around 20% in believability. They should be, too. Because in most cases, Americans would receive nearly the same news if politicians just e-mailed us all their press releases and eliminated the media people altogether.
Except for just a handful of well known investigative reporters, there are no "journalists" covering the waste, fraud and abuse in government anymore. And there most certainly are not any "journalists" willing to report any of the thousands of violations of our Constitution every year.
Besides, they can't write about things they do not understand. And, if they ever did, they wouldn't be invited to all those interesting parties.
Ninety percent of the officials in Washington obviously have no intention of obeying the Constitution. If they did, the federal law books would probably all fit on one shelf. No reporter can rock that boat.
The day to day politics of our nation's Capital is made up of entangling alliances. So there is no surprise to find a synergistic relationship (and more) between politicians and the reporters making up the national press corps. The fact is, they need each other. And simply put, the career needs of both groups are best met when they get along with each other.
Liberals are quoted as gospel. Republicans are balanced.
Media and politicans are down around 20% in believability.
With few exceptions, few journalists are reporting fraud and abuse, and no one wants to report the rabid abuse of the Constitution.
And on Day 5 Government placed restrictions thereon. 8<)
So very, very true.
This Liberal-Socialist media of our's has us ALL in some deep kimcheee.
...be in everyone's best interests to deal with this horrible problem head-on asap, too.
Mea Culpa Sir/M'am.
...just written by the same outstanding person, is all.
I've spent almost 40 years now, talking about, writing about, and practicing in the Supreme Court, on constitutional issues. I know that what I do is boring to most people, and when I give a speech on such, I use as much humor as possible. I know that constitutional law can put a glaze on the eyes of most listeners like a Sung vase.
However, there is a part of the non-discussion of constitutional issues which is deliberate. To some extent they are pushed out of the national media not because they are boring, but because they are dangerous. Feder is quite right that much which goes on in Congress, and in Washington in general, is done in contempt of the Constitution.
Injecting the idea that politicians and bureaucrats should "obey the Constitution" is therefore a very unpleasant idea to many. And Feder's point that reporters "get along by going along" (to use Sam Rayburn's famous phrase) is right on the money. And thus, basic issues that do matter greatly to the folks outside the Beltway, and especially to folks here on FreeRepublic, get buried.
The only cure I see is to get more people elected to office who actually know about and care about basic constitutional issues. Then the press would be compelled, in the process of covering those elected officials, to cover the constitutional issues they now shun.
Seeking to head the country in that better direction was one of the reasons I wrote my seventh book. This one's especially for y'all, FReepers. try the last link below for "Restore Trust," if you have not already done so.
Congressman Billybob
Click for "Oedipus and the Democrats"
Fact of the matter is that the relationship between the Washington press corp, and the politicians they are supposed to cover, is totally incestuous.
The California Constitution prohibits the State from borrowing more than $300,000 without a vote of the people.
You have probably read that California is in the process of borrowing $12 billion in short term "Revenue Anticipation Notes" to pay off the $7.5 billion in "Revenue Anticipation Warrants", which were used to pay off the $3.5 billion in Revenue Anticipation Notes [Is there a trend here?]. Even more egregious is the largest municipal bond issuance in World History - the $12 billion in energy bonds.
Not one of these were put to a vote of the people as the constitution requires.
Yet these egregious violations of the California Constitution have NEVER been questioned anywhere but FreeRepublic, AFAIK. Why not?
Even the Simon campaign refuses to call Gov. Davis on this. Why IS that?
Speaking of Davis you have got to explore this new website:
...to see what bad, bad things Davis has done... - CLICK HERE
now it isn't the cream that rises to the top... it is the shit!!
Liberals are quoted as gospel. Republicans are balanced.
This author is conflicted; he says "politicians"--implying "they all do it; they're all alike"--but in the next breath he tells the truth that there is a systematic difference between the parties in their relationship to journalism.The fact is that journalism has a superficial, negative perspective because journalists/editors who do not, do not attract attention and do make money. That creates a propaganda wind down which certain politicians choose to sail. Those politicians are known as liberals.
Some of them even freely admit it.
"Americans just want us to solve America's problems of health and safety -- and not be concerned if they can be constitutionally justified. ... Why, if we had to do that we could not pass most of the laws we enact around here."
-- Senator John Glenn, 7/16/96
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.