Time was, a Democrat could say any old thing, no matter how outrageous, and that would instantly become conventional wisdom among reporters and newscasters from sea to shining sea. Byrd says the carrier landing was a disgrace? Well then, that's what everyone thinks, and no one in the public would ever hear otherwise. The carrier landing was a disgrace. Did you know that? No, I didn't, but I guess it's true... everyone says so. I thought it was kind of neat myself, but I must be alone in that. This is how Byrd has spent his entire adult life. The press in the United States -- all of it, in every medium -- has been a cheerleading section for the Democratic Party. He could say anything, and it would be on the news that night; in all the papers tomorrow. He was a Democrat, from the mighty state of West Virginia, and that made him important. You could tell, because everything he said showed up in the New York Times. Did Byrd have to worry about what some Republican might say? Hell no. Nothing a Republican said would get on the news, unless it was a "courageous" Republican who was agreeing with the Democrats. I'm not sure there are any more conservatives out in the public than there ever were. It's just that now, they can't be buffaloed into thinking that Byrd's comments represent anything more than cynical, and quite desperate, hatchetry. Byrd will still see his criticisms prominently displayed in the pages of the New York Times and the Washington Post, just like he always has. So far as he can tell, nothing has changed. Good. |
I think what's happened is that the media environment has expanded to include people who are not automatically Cheerleaders Of The Party, and some Democrats still don't understand the implications of that.