ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

Brock: Any press is good press

The one thing it seems many people agree on this year is that the media is somehow responsible for our nation's problems and how limiting news coverage would be better for our country.

Harvey Brock

The one thing it seems many people agree on this year is that the media is somehow responsible for our nation's problems and how limiting news coverage would be better for our country.

Some people are quick to blame a lot of our nation's ills on social media, in that too much information and discussions is somehow destructive.

One example they point to is the reporting, analysis and posts about the race for the White House.

Many believe presidential candidates are being unfairly scrutinized-especially if a partisan media portrays the candidate of their choosing negatively.

The argument is nothing new and one I have heard for years. But obviously an election year presents more opportunity. Social media has undoubtedly given more people an expanded soapbox to express their opinion, and to agree or disagree with others more than ever before.

ADVERTISEMENT

Personally, I can't see how more people are paying closer attention to the election of their next president is such a bad thing. What I find surprising is not how quick backers of candidates are to express their support for their guy or gal, but how they feel the need to explain the reason or make excuses for his or her comments or stated position.

When they don't, the video was edited. Or his or her words were taken out of context. Or the candidate was misquoted. They cite the news source as having a liberal agenda or a conservative agenda as the reason and basis for negatively portraying their candidate.

Being in the news business, I'm the first to agree that there are certainly left- and right-wing leaning news agencies. But if a candidate says something-with all of the reporting from both sides-rarely is a candidate misquoted or his comments edited. The analysis by the news agency and the coverage or lack of speeches is often by design to put the candidate in a positive or negative light.

Still, as a newspaper guy who knows a little about marketing, I find it hard to believe that the billion-dollar enterprises the campaigns have become still allow candidates to make comments off the cuff that aren't part of an overall strategy.

Donald Trump has made statements the past year that his opponents jumped on quickly as proof that he shouldn't be president. But when the smoke had cleared from the Republican primary, Trump was the only one left standing-not despite his controversial statements, but because of them.

Both recent party conventions each had more negative analysis and posts than positive. But at the end-not surprisingly-each candidate received a bump in the polls, which was definitely a reminder of the old truism that "any press is good press." Especially if you are running for president.

Related Topics: ELECTION 2016
Opinion by Harvey Brock
What To Read Next
The Dickinson Press Editorial Board stands with the wild horses and calls on the National Park Service to extend public commentary period
“From the Hawks’ Nest” is a monthly column by Dickinson State University President Steve Easton
"Life is a team effort no matter what, and greed puts you out on a lonely limb," writes Kevin Holten.
"Our life of faith is a life with God. And that makes all the difference," writes Boniface Muggli