Defining what’s at issue in 2006
One of the effective ways a newspaper can use the web is to post background or context for on-going stories, e.g. context for the 2006 mid-term elections. The Washington Post offers a look at eight “issues” that it thinks will be important this November.
This feature illustrates much that is wrong in political reporting today. Let me get at it by considering the definition of “issue.”
After wading through those 11 entries on dictionary.com, let me give you a rhetorical definition: an issue is the product of stasis–the point at which we agree to disagree. Another way to say it: An issue is a common expression of a disagreement.
(Here’s what that looks like in the negative. There is no “abortion” issue in America yet because the problem of abortion as it is experienced and expressed is out of stasis. To over-simplify for the sake of illustration: One side claims to be “pro-life” and the other claims to be “pro-choice.” These positions argue different issues. Abortion will remain out of stasis because neither side wants to argue on the opposition’s turf. They have yet to agree to disagree.)
Of the eight “issues” the Post considers, only three appear to be real issues. The rest are are political situations that affect politicians far more than they effect voters.
A rhetorical definition of “issue” is more useful if it is the goal of journalists to give people the information they need to make public life work. Such a definition forces the journalist to separate political situations that affect politicians from issues involving policy and governance that affect people. Then it requires journalists to understand that issues are (or should be) more important to voters than political situations.
I am not saying that political situations are uninteresting or unimportant or that journalists shouldn’t cover them. Instead, I’m continuing to make an old argument: Journalists should, for the most part, tell a different story of politics–the story of policy and governance as experienced by citizens.
Tag: journalism
Tag: rhetoric
Tag: politics
While you were looking up “issue,” I was digging into the etymology of “bellwether.”
But seriously, it is indeed a strange way to approach “issues.” I guess the idea is to make the reader feel like an insider, privy to campaign strategy.
Sven… Interesting
re: privy
Yes, which I think is a big problem.
A member of the “Cheddarsphere” up here in Wisconsin – a former reporter who ran the current governor’s last campaign – has a quite appropos post about how the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel helps generate the political “shrill cycle.”
He follows up with another post about how the JS has relegated itself to covering the mere echoes of politics – money, polls and TV commercials.
Also: none of this matters anyway. We won’t have time for any kind of news or issues; the rest of our lives will be spent peeling back the layers of these four paragraphs.
Yes, interesting news
And good links re: the MJS.