Wednesday, September 30, 2020

Media Mistakes and False Equivalencies

 

The media keeps making these cringeworthy mistakes

 

 

Opinion by 

Jennifer Rubin

Columnist

September 30, 2020 at 11:19 a.m. CDT

In the aftermath of President Trump’s unhinged, embarrassing and frightful performance Tuesday night, we are told “the debate” was a dumpster fire, “the debate” was a low point in American politics, “the debate” was incoherent. The worst appearance by a U.S. president in history is magically transformed into a non-personified event — the debate itself. Why do so many headline writers, anchors and pundits fall into this trap?

 

This poor sense of “balance” still afflicts too many journalists, who become nervous that by reporting what is plain to see, they’re taking “sides.” But the only side they would be taking is that of truth: The president lacks impulse control. When threatened, he lashes out and blusters his way past scrutiny. The president is a racist (telling a white-supremacist group to “stand back and stand by” should be disqualifying in and of itself), an authoritarian bully (inciting his followers to intimidate voters at the polls) and untethered to reality. He was not “too hot” as Trump apologists claimed; he was too nutty.

 

If false balance was the major defect running through post-debate commentary, it was not the only one. Sadly, many of these media mistakes have gone unaddressed since Trump rode down his fake-gold escalator five years ago.

 

The compulsion to attribute intentionality to Trump’s behavior leads to ludicrous explanations. Pundits, for example, too often claim that Trump tries to scare suburban women, a large and critical part of the electorate, so that he can pump up his base — White males who have never abandoned him. This is irrational, but worse, it is almost certainly false. Trump does what he does because he cannot help himself. Does anyone really believe that he looks at polls objectively? It seems he cannot plan a day ahead — let alone a month ahead. He certainly cannot control the impulse to insult and degrade others. His narcissism and lack of conscience — not calculation — lead him to do things that are self-destructive. There was no benefit for Trump in refusing to denounce white nationalists at Tuesday’s debate. That moment was about Trump refusing to be told to denounce racists.

 

Likewise, many pundits were compelled to give former vice president Joe Biden the nonsensical advice to not show up for more debates, even though his lead is steadily building and instant polls suggest he clobbered Trump. Granted, none of us wants to watch another debate, but that does not mean it is in Biden’s interest to avoid giving Trump every opportunity to offend voters and depress Republicans. It has become a running joke that practically everything conventional-wisdom-spouting pundits say is bad for Biden — e.g., Trump’s rushing through a Supreme Court nomination, Biden’s decision to respect covid-19 precautions while campaigning — turns out to be a positive for him. Polls show large majorities of Americans want the next president to nominate the new justice, favor Obamacare (which Judge Amy Coney Barrett has said is unconstitutional) and oppose reversing Roe v. Wade.

 

As a corollary to the habitual bad advice syndrome, I would suggest much of the fault lies in the media image of “voters” as White men. The nondescript voter in the Rust Belt or in suburbia is a woman, statistically speaking. Women will likely make up 52 to 54 percent of the electorate. Rather than ask how their prototypical White male would feel about confirming a justice who would likely allow abortion to be criminalized, they would do well to ask a suburban mom or a 30-something single, working woman. It does reorient one’s thinking.

 

Finally, as poll after poll shows Biden with a commanding lead in the three critical Blue Wall states he must win (Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania) and stunning success in states no Democrat has won in decades (e.g., Georgia, Arizona), the best-kept secret in media coverage seems to be that the race is not close and has not been for months.

 

Granted, everyone is skittish after 2016, but when national polls, a wide array of state polls, absentee-ballot requests, early-voting statistics and anecdotal evidence (e.g., public vigils for the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg) all point in one direction, it behooves the media to say so.

 

Trump has been behind for months and has done nothing but alienate the groups he cannot afford to lose (e.g., White women, college-educated voters, older voters).

 

It is only once one recognizes the near-certainty of Trump’s defeat that his plans for disrupting and discrediting the election can be seen as the last gasps of a desperate man who has neither the capacity nor the will to avoid proving his own unfitness to lead.

 

The media’s preference for a horse race needs to give way to a preference for the unvarnished truth.