Its not that I think that we shouldn’t criticize the President during wartime.
Far from it.
Rather I think that when we do criticize a wartime President, the media has to drop the typical sort of “he said”, “she said” conflict journalism and start really digging into issues. Report the good, the bad and the ugly, and let Americans make up our own minds.
Instead, this election I had to listen to hours of mindless drivel from both parties as they each slavishly repeated talking points crafted by nameless staffers. Somehow, this passed for journalism in the media.
The media complains about the candidates not covering the issues, but when they do, they don’t cover the candidates.
It would have been trivial for each of the major media websites to provide a section where they collected each candidates statements on a number of issues, along with in-depth analysis by different factions.
Did they do so? No. Because they don’t care. Conflict journalism pays the bills.
But in wartime, it also kills.
Bottom line, criticize the President all you want, but know what you’re talking about. That’s the only standard I think we need set. In peacetime, we can afford the constant partisan blather. In wartime, the partisans need to take the time to turn their blather into constructive criticism.
Otherwise, shut the hell up. I have a remote control, and I know how to use it.
Recent Comments