After the 2008 election, the conservative news media commentary about
Obama intensified. The most extreme public commentary originated from
people like Bill O’Reilly, Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck, who did not
hesitate to use words like “blood-sucker,” “socialism,” and “fascism” in
reference to the president. Radio news commentator Lee Rodgers claimed
Obama “clearly is more sympathetic with the long-term goals of world
communism, and let’s be blunt about it, Muslim terrorists, than with any
legitimate American goals” (The Lee Rodgers Show, March 11, 2009).
Joe Scarborough is a MSNBC cable news commentator and former
member of the House of Representatives, a native of Florida and a
prominent Republican with a large following. In commenting on Obama’s
policies, he lamented that under Obama the country is “moving closer
toward European-style socialism ... That’s not a right-wing claim, it’s the
truth” (Morning Joe, MSNBC, March 4, 2009).
People may consider such outbursts nothing more than overblown
rhetoric designed to draw a larger audience or sell more newspapers, but
constant repetition of misleading, frightening images will take hold,
regardless of the original intent.
The media played a significant role in the 2008 election, one that
reached far beyond objective reporting. For both Palin and Obama, the
variety of English spoken by the candidate became the focus, a way to
draw attention to facts or events which could not be raised otherwise
within the confines of what is socially acceptable. Potential concern about
Palin’s working-class, rural connections (real or embellished) was
subverted into a discussion of her syntax and “g-dropping.” In Obama’s
case, the unvoiced questions were more complex and touched on highly
explosive topics, such as “Can we trust an African American man who
sounds like Obama?”
The questions raised by the media may be sensible or silly, constructive
or disruptive, but the importance or relevance of those questions does not
determine how successfully they will take root in the public’s mind. The
media can make things come true by simple repetition, or proof by
assertion. A demonstrably false claim that is constantly repeated will gain
a foothold. This is a tactic that doesn’t always work, but it seems to be
particularly successful in political contexts. When it does work, the
constant repetition may wear down the opposition so that they retreat or
surrender, at which point the proof by assentation is complete.
ff
(ff)
#1