Mainstream Media and the Debates

Here's what I wrote in response to an article on cnn.com regarding Ron Paul, who is running for President. Whether or not you happen to want Ron Paul in the Presidency or some other candidate, I think the message is universal to both sides of the coin - The media needs to stop this BS (not that I am expecting them to but hey, why not at least hope?)

BTW - I am supporting Ron Paul for president.

I wish the media would refrain from ""favoriting"" certain candidates in the first place. I wish I could see unbiased debates. Here's my recommendations.

1) All the candidates should get equal time to get answer every question.

2) Have every candidate on your news shows for an equal amount of time every week (maybe focus each weeks topic around a central theme and let them speak about the topic)

3) refrain from using words like ""front runner"" ""first tier"" ""second tier"" ""fringe"" etc. It taints and quantifies/disqualifies candidates unnecessarily. When you label someone a ""front runner"", what criteria are you using? Money in the bank? Support of the party or media elite? Where he/she shops for clothing (snappiest dresser? and this affects my pocketbook HOW?)

About half of the candidates running (either party) are not well known outside of Washington. In order to make an informed decision, we need to hear from them. As it is now, it seem like ""you"" (media) have chosen for ""us"" the candidates you want and we have to choose from those. Uh, no thanks.

Our country is at a crossroads and there''s important decisions that will need to be made by our next President. I believe that Americans want and deserve the information to make an informed decision.

http://www.journalism.org/resources/principles

Principles of Journalism
In 1997, an organization then administered by PEJ, the Committee of Concerned Journalists, began a national conversation among citizens and news people to identify and clarify the principles that underlie journalism. After four years of research, including 20 public forums around the country, a reading of journalism history, a national survey of journalists, and more, the group released a Statement of Shared Purpose that identified nine principles. These became the basis for The Elements of Journalism, the book by PEJ Director Tom Rosenstiel and CCJ Chairman and PEJ Senior Counselor Bill Kovach. Here are those principles, as outlined in the original Statement of Shared Purpose.
A Statement of Purpose
After extended examination by journalists themselves of the character of journalism at the end of the twentieth century, we offer this common understanding of what defines our work. The central purpose of journalism is to provide citizens with accurate and reliable information they need to function in a free society.
This encompasses myriad roles--helping define community, creating common language and common knowledge, identifying a community's goals, heros and villains, and pushing people beyond complacency. This purpose also involves other requirements, such as being entertaining, serving as watchdog and offering voice to the voiceless.
Over time journalists have developed nine core principles to meet the task. They comprise what might be described as the theory of journalism:
1. Journalism's first obligation is to the truth
Democracy depends on citizens having reliable, accurate facts put in a meaningful context. Journalism does not pursue truth in an absolute or philosophical sense, but it can--and must--pursue it in a practical sense. This "journalistic truth" is a process that begins with the professional discipline of assembling and verifying facts. Then journalists try to convey a fair and reliable account of their meaning, valid for now, subject to further investigation. Journalists should be as transparent as possible about sources and methods so audiences can make their own assessment of the information. Even in a world of expanding voices, accuracy is the foundation upon which everything else is built--context, interpretation, comment, criticism, analysis and debate. The truth, over time, emerges from this forum. As citizens encounter an ever greater flow of data, they have more need--not less--for identifiable sources dedicated to verifying that information and putting it in context.
2. Its first loyalty is to citizens
While news organizations answer to many constituencies, including advertisers and shareholders, the journalists in those organizations must maintain allegiance to citizens and the larger public interest above any other if they are to provide the news without fear or favor. This commitment to citizens first is the basis of a news organization's credibility, the implied covenant that tells the audience the coverage is not slanted for friends or advertisers. Commitment to citizens also means journalism should present a representative picture of all constituent groups in society. Ignoring certain citizens has the effect of disenfranchising them. The theory underlying the modern news industry has been the belief that credibility builds a broad and loyal audience, and that economic success follows in turn. In that regard, the business people in a news organization also must nurture--not exploit--their allegiance to the audience ahead of other considerations.
3. Its essence is a discipline of verification
Journalists rely on a professional discipline for verifying information. When the concept of objectivity originally evolved, it did not imply that journalists are free of bias. It called, rather, for a consistent method of testing information--a transparent approach to evidence--precisely so that personal and cultural biases would not undermine the accuracy of their work. The method is objective, not the journalist. Seeking out multiple witnesses, disclosing as much as possible about sources, or asking various sides for comment, all signal such standards. This discipline of verification is what separates journalism from other modes of communication, such as propaganda, fiction or entertainment. But the need for professional method is not always fully recognized or refined. While journalism has developed various techniques for determining facts, for instance, it has done less to develop a system for testing the reliability of journalistic interpretation.
4. Its practitioners must maintain an independence from those they cover
Independence is an underlying requirement of journalism, a cornerstone of its reliability. Independence of spirit and mind, rather than neutrality, is the principle journalists must keep in focus. While editorialists and commentators are not neutral, the source of their credibility is still their accuracy, intellectual fairness and ability to inform--not their devotion to a certain group or outcome. In our independence, however, we must avoid any tendency to stray into arrogance, elitism, isolation or nihilism.
5. It must serve as an independent monitor of power
Journalism has an unusual capacity to serve as watchdog over those whose power and position most affect citizens. The Founders recognized this to be a rampart against despotism when they ensured an independent press; courts have affirmed it; citizens rely on it. As journalists, we have an obligation to protect this watchdog freedom by not demeaning it in frivolous use or exploiting it for commercial gain.
6. It must provide a forum for public criticism and compromise
The news media are the common carriers of public discussion, and this responsibility forms a basis for our special privileges. This discussion serves society best when it is informed by facts rather than prejudice and supposition. It also should strive to fairly represent the varied viewpoints and interests in society, and to place them in context rather than highlight only the conflicting fringes of debate. Accuracy and truthfulness require that as framers of the public discussion we not neglect the points of common ground where problem solving occurs.
7. It must strive to make the significant interesting and relevant
Journalism is storytelling with a purpose. It should do more than gather an audience or catalogue the important. For its own survival, it must balance what readers know they want with what they cannot anticipate but need. In short, it must strive to make the significant interesting and relevant. The effectiveness of a piece of journalism is measured both by how much a work engages its audience and enlightens it. This means journalists must continually ask what information has most value to citizens and in what form. While journalism should reach beyond such topics as government and public safety, a journalism overwhelmed by trivia and false significance ultimately engenders a trivial society.
8. It must keep the news comprehensive and proportional
Keeping news in proportion and not leaving important things out are also cornerstones of truthfulness. Journalism is a form of cartography: it creates a map for citizens to navigate society. Inflating events for sensation, neglecting others, stereotyping or being disproportionately negative all make a less reliable map. The map also should include news of all our communities, not just those with attractive demographics. This is best achieved by newsrooms with a diversity of backgrounds and perspectives. The map is only an analogy; proportion and comprehensiveness are subjective, yet their elusiveness does not lessen their significance.
9. Its practitioners must be allowed to exercise their personal conscience
Every journalist must have a personal sense of ethics and responsibility--a moral compass. Each of us must be willing, if fairness and accuracy require, to voice differences with our colleagues, whether in the newsroom or the executive suite. News organizations do well to nurture this independence by encouraging individuals to speak their minds. This stimulates the intellectual diversity necessary to understand and accurately cover an increasingly diverse society. It is this diversity of minds and voices, not just numbers, that matters.

I have to go to Palm Springs on business, and am hoping some RP supporters will go to this site and respond. There is an excellent Ron Paul article and only one person ahas commented on it...very negative and incorrect. This is a problem. Great articles everywhere...negative comments by people who have not studied RP on the issues. Please go make some good comments as this is a much visited site.
http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_alex_wal_070606_ron_...

I have visited the "Liberty Card" ad/idea and think it is great (definitely the price is right ), However, I personally want a different kind of card. As we know, it is not necessary to be a Republican (except for the nomination) to want RP as President. It is not necessary to be a Libertarian...Democrat...over 50...under 30...red or yellow, black or white....fundamentalist, liberal or conservative...Christian, Morman, Jewish, Hindu, Muslem, etc. The root we share is American. I want to be a "card-carrying" Ron Paul supporter with a card that unites all the above because that best defines me and, I believe, is key to getting Ron Paul elected.

Such a card would not call out any specific party. It would just have on the front Ron's "Freedom Principles" with a place for me to sign my pledge to those Freedom Principles and might have the list on the back of "Ron Paul has never done this...and that...taken money for junkets...voted for the war, etc." If this was available at a cost similar to the Liberty Card prices, I'd pay $20 for a pack of 20 and bet others would as well.

This would (1) appeal to all the grass , (2) raise money for the campaign (3) and, be in line with uh, future eventualities. (ie some have suggested that if RP were not to get the nomination, he might be persuaded to run as a libertarian. I don't know if this is true, but if it were to happen..the grass-root campaign needs prior to make it clear that he is the Candidate for All the People.).