RSLudlum
01-02-2008, 10:03 PM
We need more leaders to stand up and speak out like this!!!
Can anybody DIGG this article??
http://www.palmettoscoop.com/2008/01/02/scgop-chair-fed-up-with-horse-race-journalism/#comment-44634
SCGOP chair fed up with horse race journalism
By Adam | January 2, 2008
South Carolina Republican Party Chairman Katon Dawson weighed in Sunday on the media’s involvement in the presidential primary process and expressed his frustration with talking head shouting matches, predictions and polls. In an interview with the Spartanburg Herald-Journal’s Jason Spencer, Dawson went so far as to say that Iowa and New Hampshire “don’t matter” to South Carolina voters.
“The danger is that the media is driving the process, especially the television media,” Dawson said. “Is it fair that George Stephanopoulos, Chris Matthews and Tim Russert… Is it fair that they’re handicapping the race from the media’s standpoint? I think it’s going to be up to Republican Party voters, myself.”
Strong words coming from our party’s leader.
He asked rhetorically: “When’s the last time one of them talked to a precinct captain?”
Dawson pointed out the inherent fallacy of polls, that most of them you hear about on television or see printed in a newspaper come with a 4 percent or 5 percent (sometimes, even higher) margin of error — which, if it doesn’t make the poll meaningless, it certainly at least makes the numbers suspect. If you spin the margin of errors just right, then Republican Ron Paul is potentially in second place in this CNN poll of South Carolina voters. And believe me, at least one Paul supporter calls or e-mails me whenever that happens.
But polls also provide an easy “hook” for the talking heads to run with.
“Campaigns can’t give up: You can’t just fold up the tent and go home because the media says you’re gone in Iowa and New Hampshire. That isn’t fair,” Dawson said. “After Florida and South Carolina, maybe you have to take a hard look, because then you have to have a lot of money to buy” victory on Feb. 5, when 22 states will hold primaries or caucuses. [JASON SPENCER - Spartanburg Herald-Journal]
I would agree with Dawson on this, except I have to admit that I’m probably guilty of this myself. Polls are just so damn sexy to lazy pundits and they’re easy to report on. Throw up the numbers, add some cheesy analysis, and you’ve got a story.
But at the philosophical core of his argument, he has a point. What influence do media wield over our elections and what role should they play? These questions have been debated for years, and they’re largely rhetorical.
One thing is certain though… the reason Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina are important in the nominating process is solely because of the overwhelming media coverage. We should be careful when biting the hand that feeds us.
For more of Spencer’s coverage on the impact of Thursday’s Iowa caucuses on South Carolina, click here.
Can anybody DIGG this article??
http://www.palmettoscoop.com/2008/01/02/scgop-chair-fed-up-with-horse-race-journalism/#comment-44634
SCGOP chair fed up with horse race journalism
By Adam | January 2, 2008
South Carolina Republican Party Chairman Katon Dawson weighed in Sunday on the media’s involvement in the presidential primary process and expressed his frustration with talking head shouting matches, predictions and polls. In an interview with the Spartanburg Herald-Journal’s Jason Spencer, Dawson went so far as to say that Iowa and New Hampshire “don’t matter” to South Carolina voters.
“The danger is that the media is driving the process, especially the television media,” Dawson said. “Is it fair that George Stephanopoulos, Chris Matthews and Tim Russert… Is it fair that they’re handicapping the race from the media’s standpoint? I think it’s going to be up to Republican Party voters, myself.”
Strong words coming from our party’s leader.
He asked rhetorically: “When’s the last time one of them talked to a precinct captain?”
Dawson pointed out the inherent fallacy of polls, that most of them you hear about on television or see printed in a newspaper come with a 4 percent or 5 percent (sometimes, even higher) margin of error — which, if it doesn’t make the poll meaningless, it certainly at least makes the numbers suspect. If you spin the margin of errors just right, then Republican Ron Paul is potentially in second place in this CNN poll of South Carolina voters. And believe me, at least one Paul supporter calls or e-mails me whenever that happens.
But polls also provide an easy “hook” for the talking heads to run with.
“Campaigns can’t give up: You can’t just fold up the tent and go home because the media says you’re gone in Iowa and New Hampshire. That isn’t fair,” Dawson said. “After Florida and South Carolina, maybe you have to take a hard look, because then you have to have a lot of money to buy” victory on Feb. 5, when 22 states will hold primaries or caucuses. [JASON SPENCER - Spartanburg Herald-Journal]
I would agree with Dawson on this, except I have to admit that I’m probably guilty of this myself. Polls are just so damn sexy to lazy pundits and they’re easy to report on. Throw up the numbers, add some cheesy analysis, and you’ve got a story.
But at the philosophical core of his argument, he has a point. What influence do media wield over our elections and what role should they play? These questions have been debated for years, and they’re largely rhetorical.
One thing is certain though… the reason Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina are important in the nominating process is solely because of the overwhelming media coverage. We should be careful when biting the hand that feeds us.
For more of Spencer’s coverage on the impact of Thursday’s Iowa caucuses on South Carolina, click here.