Friday, February 23, 2007
|
|
HamNation: Do Pundits Matter?
|
|
Posted by:
Mary Katharine Ham at
10:50 AM
|
|
You know, when you live in D.C. and among the blogs, it's easy to forget you're really weird-- that not everyone knows that Andrew Sullivan's dramatic shift from pro-war ideological conservative to strident war opponent based mostly on a single social-issue disagreement with the Bush administration may have lessened his credibility as a pundit. Yep, you're weird. I was working on a special project this week, one of the topics for which was, "Do Pundits Matter?" so I took to the mall to find out. Aside from getting, err, questioned about our filming several times by mall security, all went smoothly for Katie and me, and we met many nice folks who, oddly, have no preference for Eleanor Clift or Tony Blankley. Yeah, I couldn't figure it out either. Oh, and my apologies for the gap in HamNation production. I've got my new computer with all the bells and whistles now, so I'm good to go. Thanks, Boss!Update: I should just add that the video doesn't convey my fleshed-out opinion on whether pundits matter. Who they are doesn't matter, but what they say eventually does-- in the aggregate. The fact that most normal folks don't know who Eleanor Clift is is reflective of exactly what Eleanor Clift and other pundits' function is. We (if I can throw myself into the pool, here) worry about politics when others don't have the time or inclination. We worry about the flora in the background of Hillary's presidential announcement video as a clue to her strategy for an election that's almost two years away. Thank goodness not everyone is worried about that. The economy would tank if bloviation were most Americans' primary export. But all the worrying about all the minutiae, two years ahead of an election, eventually boils down to the messages people hear in their daily lives when they finally get around to paying attention, sometimes just shortly before an election. All the mess we toss around day in and day out is all part of creating the environment in which folks will elect a new president in '08, and it will affect them, even if they have no idea who we are or what we did. I'm not sure that's an ideal system, but it sure should keep anyone's head from getting too big. We are weird.
|
|
I agree the choice of music is perfect, but I also know that Russ Hauth, VP of Salem’s NNPA Division, Chairman of the National Religious Broadcasters Music Licensing Committee and all-around Nice Guy, has always been at the forefront of making sure that music heard on Salem radio stations are properly licensed for streaming on the Web. I assume that Salem pays the licensing fees to BMI or ASCAP for using “Who Are You” and “She Drives Me Crazy” in her vlogs.
The only reason why I bring this up is because I don’t want the anti-Christian programming directors at Google/YouTube pulling any of your vids on “legal” grounds because there’s a question about the music licensing.
Personally, I’d like to see Chuck DeFeo add more videos like yours to TownHall.com and start laying the infrastructure for TownHall bloggers to upload their “citizen journalist” video reports that could be shared on SRNnews.com too.
And how great would it be to see HDTV versions of HamNation on all of our broadband-enabled laptops and PCs? |
|
...those that "do" know what a pundit is, stay informed and stay in tuned w/the political condition "are important". Especially prior to a major election. Then folks [like the one's interviewed] begin to scramble to find out something about the candidates prior to voting. Kinda' like cram'ing for a test. The "informed ones" will act as a magnet in a sense. Either repel'ing or attracting. If they are enthusiastic about a certain candidate [like GOP voters in 2000/04] they will pull in or attract voters to that candidate. If they have become tired of being tuned-out, insulted and poked in the eye by the ones they voted for then they will repel those in their periphery to that same, now rejected, candidate or party. This is what happened on 11/7/06. This is what happens when a political party dis's its core/base supporters and thinks they can do without them.
So now, more than ever, it is important that we have these free discussions and free flow of ideas/opinions.
Don't get discouraged MKH!
And I want to thank Townhall for making it possible and providing us a place to vent. DD
http://streetlevel.townhall.com |
|
One drawback though is linking their influence in the aggregate. Then campaign reform police will be hunting you like criminals. "How much did producing that tape cost, how many people saw it, and were they all members of your org? ... Ah ha, I thought so. We'll decide if that is campaigning, mam"
|
|
"Update: I should just add that the video doesn't convey my fleshed-out opinion on whether pundits matter. Who they are doesn't matter, but what they say eventually does-- in the aggregate."...
does not tell you anything? |
|
|
|
MKH, I realize this was a tongue-in-cheek kind of thing (and well done), but did you find anybody who knew what you were talking about?
|
|
There's a word I once heard used for people who spend much of their waking lives thinking about and forming opinions about politics: "dorks".
No no, that's not meant as an insult. It's meant with the same mixture of mirth and affection that we might call very computer-savvy person a "geek" or "nerd". The words are traditionally insulting, but in these cases they're meant in an ironic sense, to actually convey a great respect at a person's talent and knowledge while still acknowledging that they'd have to be a little weird to be so good at what they do.
You make an interesting point and a good one. Most people aren't obsessive about politics. Instead they're busy working and doing the things that keep this country going, and thank goodness they do. But when they need to think about politics, the message they get is a filtered version of what the "dorks" have been saying for the last several years. So God bless the dorks.
And yeah, I'm enough of a dork to also be saddened by Andrew Sullivan's deterioration.
Oh, and bentman78, you might want to get ahold of Firefox 2.0. Gotta love the built-in spell checker. :-)
|
|
|
Alas, I don't think anyone really cares about what my opinions are other than people that are absolutely obsessed with politics. And that's probably the way it should be. |
|
|
You nailed it -- it's all about the money and establishing a following. Say something negative about Malkin, Coulter, or Olberman/Franke (on other sites) and you are likely to get 15 responses telling you how you have it wrong and shouldn't pick on "poor" (fill in pundit of your choice). |
|
|
The answer to the mud-wrestling question is easy. Susan Estrich would win because she would open her mouth and that noise would send Phyllis scurrying for the door. |
|
..of some.
In modern politcs, the pundits think they are newsworthy(a source) because they have opinions -or views on opinions. When news gets to be about them its either a slow day, or there's one Ariana Huffington too many.
|
|
|
They all worship at the altars of extremist ideologies. The profit motive for the pundits' networks/shows/websites drives them to polarize people more and more. All this does is make it harder for government officials to come up with solutions that work for everyone -- not just the 50% of people on a pundit's side. |
|
Great, great, great. Keep up this wonderful (had to find another word) work.
BTW, bentman: there is a nifty little site called "Answers.com" you can download and open another tab to check spelling when a site doesn't offer spellcheck. Not 100% but better than nothing.
The new generation, of course, doesn't need Spellcheck because, they aren't taught to read or spell in school and anyway they listen to their cell phones, music and use a "shorthand" type of spelling I can't understand when they IM.
I sound like I know what I'm talking about, time to end this comment. |
|
|
So, would Ham and Malkin be "Halkin", or "Malam"? |
|
|
Man, I need to learn to use spell check. |
|
to Still468:
No, they'll vote, unfortuantly the only information they will have to make their decisions comes from MTV and the View. So those people won't get the full story, but then again they're probably to lazy to look anything up for themselves.
Nice location MKH, my neck of the woods. I wish I was there to see you guys filming. |
|
Philips vs. Susan...
Things that make you go {shudder}.
|
|
|
I'd rather see a match up with Ms Ham and Malkin. |
|
|
I bet you would've gotten the same blank stares if you had asked them who Condi, Newt, or Lady Thatcher is. The very scary part is, these are potential voters, if they can break away from the people magazine long enough to show up. |
|
|
|