Video Link of MSNBC playing the race card
The link above leads to a report from MSNBC on John McCain’s VP choice, Sarah Palin, just one day after he chose her. For perspective, most of the public across party lines does not know who this woman is. We don’t know what her qualifications are or why she was chosen over better known candidates (especially given her complete absence of foreign policy experience during a time of war). Therefore, responsible journalists would seek to answer these questions.
Oddly, MSNBC chose to do a very positive, softball story on Palin, interviewing local Alaskans about the pride they must feel that one of their own has been selected, and speaking of the various demographics that she will supposedly excite. To cap it off, MSNBC reported on her Miss Alaska beauty pageant in 1984, where she placed 2nd. They could have ended it there, and left it as just another part of her biography, but they chose to give the audience a bit more information about that pageant. You see, MSNBC felt it was important for us to know the person Sarah lost to…was a black woman.
Yes, Miss Alaska 1984 was a black woman, the first black woman in history to win the title of Miss Alaska. Maryline Blackburn is her name, and she sparked the curiosity of MSNBC enough for them to investigate into what she’s doing today. They found out she’s a singer, and oh what a voice. But why in the world should we care? What possible relevancy does the personal career of Maryline Blackburn have to this historic US election? (at a time when our country is at war?) Absolutely none. So why did MSNBC choose to report this? Simple, they played the race card to help Sarah Palin.
See Sarah Palin is already in trouble. She has openly admitted in an interview with CNBC that she doesn’t know what the vice president does. She has admitted that she hasn’t been paying attention to the Iraq War, and thus doesn’t have much of an opinion about it (things were really busy in Alaska). She has absolutely no foreign policy experience, no national experience (she’s never held a national office), most members of her own party don’t even know who she is, and John McCain only met her once before choosing her. She’s never dealt with the national press, she’s never been vetted by the national press. She’s only been Mayor of small town in Alaska (less than 9000 people) and governor of Alaska for 18 months. That’s it. Yet she was picked over Mitt Romney. She was picked over Tim Pawlenty. She was picked over Mike Huckabee, over Condi Rice, over Colin Powell. Why?
So MSNBC had PLENTY of material concerning Sarah Palin to work with and form a news story on that is just about her. However, they went out of their way to discuss Maryline Blackburn and here’s why:
- Sarah Palin is white
- Maryline Blackburn is black
- Maryline beat Sarah in a Miss Alaska contest, which means a black woman beat a white woman in a beauty contest
- MSNBC hopes this will anger white people, particularly white women, against black people
- White women will then funnel/transfer this anger into the 2008 elections, where Barack Obama (a black man) will be the competition
- White people, particularly white women, will then choose to support Sarah Palin and thus vote for John McCain in efforts to redeem Sarah Palin from her loss to a black woman years ago.
One might say “that’s ridiculous, these racial conspiracy theories are just wildly overblown”. But the truth is, the subconscious is very powerful and plays a strong role in people’s decision making process. This is why advertisers pay so much money to get their ads shown. They know customers won’t buy directly from them simply because they tell them to do so. However, if they embed a slogan, a short little song, a cutesy cartoon character, or compelling imagery into the commercial, they will stimulate the subconscious of their viewers and plant their commercial into it.
(Quick proof: Finish this song and tell who it is for “The best part of waking up…” Answer at the bottom of the blog post)
Earlier in the campaign, CNN would use dial meters to record how people felt emotionally to various responses in the debates. This story was an exercise in that. It was to prick any hidden prejudice within the viewers (namely white viewers) who might publicly (and even sincerely) claim they are not racist, but knowingly or unknowingly harbor some racist feelings deep down. The kind of feelings that say “I like black people, but I don’t want my daughter marrying one.”
And these feelings are never direct. That is, I don’t believe anyone is going to walk into the voting booth and say to themselves “man, I don’t like how that black woman beat Sarah Palin, Sarah seems real nice. Well I’ll help her out with my vote.” But what I do think is it adds up. This story breaks and plants its seed in the subconscious. And then other news stories, like when Luke Russert followed around Muslim girls at the Denver Democratic National Convention, and asked them “Kennedy was the candidate for Catholics. Do you think Obama will be the candidate for Muslims?” (which draws a false parallel, because Kennedy WAS Catholic, and Obama is NOT a Muslim.) That plants a seed. Everytime someone in the media says ‘Osama’ instead of ‘Obama’, that plants a seed.
Then other reporters and pundits ask “do we KNOW Obama?” (As if he doesn’t have 2 autobiographical self written books and 18 months of media exposure) Is he one of us? (As if he wasn’t raised by his white family from Kansas) Why isn’t he doing better in the polls? Will this be BAD for him? Could he have said this differently? Did he say enough? Did he say too much? Will Biden be enough for people to be comfortable with him? How will this play in rural Ohio? etc.
All those things plant seeds into the subconscious, often along cultural and ethnic lines. And the hope is that some voters will reach the voting booth and be swayed by a forest of fear, anger, or racism that has grown in their subconscious from all these seeds.
The media’s JOB is to report to us, not to manipulate us. And stories like this show efforts to manipulate. Looks like change doesn’t just need to come to Washington, change needs to come to media.
EDIT:
It’s interesting that MSNBC found time and interest to report on Maryline Blackburn, but haven’t found the time or interest to report on the McCain family. Aside from his daughter Meghan and her blog, and the fact that Cindy’s sons are in the military, we really haven’t heard much about the McCain family. For example, when have you heard about Bridget McCain, the daughter they adopted? What about the children from McCain’s first marriage? That’s alot more relevant to this election than Maryline Blackburn is. MSNBC has also yet to do alot of reporting (if any) on John McCain’s Keating 5 scandal, or his campaigns ties to Columbian terrorists. We haven’t seen shots of his 7-8 homes, or learned of his million dollar parking lot , or seen his wife’s tax returns. We haven’t heard updated information on McCain’s skin cancer, or his incredibly long health records. We haven’t even recenly heard about his temper, and if it’s improving or just better publicly managed. Is he on medication for it? etc.
The point is, there are ALOT of stories MSNBC can be convering. It’s too bad their decisions seek to divide the public along racial lines.
Answer: “The best part of waking up is Folgers in your cup” by Folgers coffee
