More economics as we prepare for debate

9:50 pm Tuesday September 23

This Friday is the first presidential debate that is supposed to be focused on foreign affairs. We know that this is where McCain is supposed to shine; we also know that public speaking is Obama's thing. The BBC reports that the Obama campaign, though, is not pumping up this debate. Instead of setting Obama up for success, they are setting McCain up for failure. The BBC reports, "This debate offers [Mr McCain] a major home-court advantage and anything short of a game-changing event will be a key missed opportunity for him."

They couldn't ignore the still growing concern of the economic crisis. They actually touched on something that I hadn't been hearing in the news. they said, "The two candidates - whose campaign plans have both been knocked off course by the crisis - have taken increasingly divergent paths on the bail-out, although both are moving gingerly lest they be blamed for blocking the rescue."

Yeah, they'll comment, but they won't have a discussion about it. They tend to attack the other candidate, rather than talk about the issue.

And we can't forget about our favourite* female vice-president. Sarah Palin has managed to stay in the headlines. Someone had hacked into her email-- but the story got juicy. It turns out that invesigators believe that it was the 20-year-old student David Kernell, son of state congressman Mike Kernell.

They also have a special editorial that I found interesting; it was about the view the rest of the world will have of the United States if we face, again, what we did in 2000. The author talks about the chances that we get a 269 to 269, and how that would make America appear weak. They also provide a new electoral map, showing exactly how this could happen; and also how this provides a much better chance to see our first women presidet; Nancy Pelosi.
They sum up what is important with one article. They said, "The candidates continue to give their responses to the US Treasury Secretary's $700bn economic bailout plan. McCain campaign managers lay into the media in general and the New York Times in particular."

This is what is important so far this week, but we'll certainly see how this changes as we grow closer to the debate, and election.

Obama Returns

5:39 PM Sunday, September 14, 2008

After a week with Sarah Palin in the headlines, Obama returns. The main story this week is that Obama got almost a half million new donors and beat his previous fundraising record. In this month, he raised over $66 million...

They talk about how he will have much more money than McCain, which Obama will need after Palin's big premier on Thursday. Even though this was the headlining story, you couldn't help but notice the story underneath. That, my friends, is another story about Sarah Palin, and her husband being supenaed in the 'troopergate scandal'.

In their blog section, they have articles about what we've learned about SArah Palin, and what the American people are looking for in a president. Although there seems to be a larger number of stories about the REpublicans, they tend to have a more negative slant than those about the democrats, making it seem as though, they are a little more left...

This is another week of unimportant issue discussion... Although, the candidates' ethics are important, we should move on to the plan to solve the energy crisis; or how we can improve the economy; or what the president means to the rest of the world. Instead, we're looking how much money they are spending now; I can think of a lot of things that $66 million dollars could buy other than ads smearing John McCain... say, solving world hunger-- or perhaps fighting illertacy?

And we're live on air

09:21 ET, Thursday, 11 September 2008-- last page update
11:45 pm Friday night 12 September 2008--date accessed


Sarah Palin had just finished her interview. The BBC, as did most news stations posted this as the most important issue of the day... and seeing as how it was still the most important issue on Friday night, they must feel that this is definitely an important issue for the upcoming election.

The BBC opens this article with a clip from the ABC interview. They really focus on her 'lack of experience'. In the interview, it is almost like a quiz to ensure that she is knowledgeable and aware of current events. The BBC also cuts off the interview after she says that America should be able to attack countries suspected of harboring terrorists without the permission of the country that they're invading... Those living in Europe and really, the target audience for the BBC are not huge fans of America and our current war fiasco. This is definitely being spun in a way that is meant to hinder the success of the Republican Party.

The article then goes down to provide analysis of what this interview meant. Although they appear to be fair and balanced, when you look at the headlines, you see 'Lack of Experience' and they go on to talk about three paragraphs. The next headline is 'Proud.' There is one paragraph talking about how she is proud, and the others, again, are talking about NATO and her son, Track.

I feel as though, again, it is easier to attack a person and their record than it is to face the issues. I think that is because most issues do not have a simple solution, and while everyone is shouting for change, no one wants to stop driving their cars, or separating their trash, or donate more to charitable causes. Few want to give up their Saturdays to help the less fortunate and more people want to have more money; less to the government. Sure, we all want change-- but we don't want to have to change; we want others to do that... so instead of holding ourselves accountable, we mention issues, and then we talk about the things we're good at talking about; other people.

They start by saying that it didn't do much to change voters. People that liked her still like her; people that didn't... still don't.

Do you know the difference between pigs and pit bulls? Apparently Sarah Palin...

So, news has moved on from Sarah Palin's pregnant daughter, and her electrifying speech. The republicans have found a nice little clip referring to pigs and lip stick, thinking that it was an allusion to the joke Sarah Palin made about hockey moms.



On BBC Wednesday, September 10 at 11:45, the main story about the election is Obama denying the charges that he was being sexists. He claims that his comments were taken out of context. The BBC writes, ""The McCain campaign would much rather have the story about phoney and foolish diversions than about the future," the Illinois senator said."

I feel like this issue is moot. McCain made the same kind of comments about Hilary Clinton. Also, the McCain campaign has been running negative ads from some time now. At least in the outlets I've been watching, I have not been seeing any kind of rebuttal from Obama. It seems that McCain can give grief, but plays the girl card when Obama fights back...

I feel like this story will blow over, and that the stories that aren't getting much attention are the ones that may make a difference. Below the Obama and lipstick story is the one where Ron Paul is calling for people to deny both candidates and pick a third party. His slogan? I'd rather throw away my vote than throw away my country. With the election as close as it is, a few thousand votes might just throw this election one way or another...

You down w/ BBC?

So, the BBC, or British Broadcasting Company... liberal? conservative? perhaps right down the middle? Although you'll find reports (actually opinionated blogs) claiming that it may be a little left of center, I feel that this is one of the few news sources that are actually fair and balanced.

I remember being in England, and watching the daily news. There was no commentary-- no emotion-- hardly any emphasis on words during the news. It was facts laid out. They didn't find it necessary to speculate .

One downside of the BBC is that, without satellite, I don't get the BBC channel, and on the site, you can't watch what they are actually reporting because the media is only supported in Europe. I thus, had to decide from the webpage whether or not this site leaned one way or another. There were a few exceptions on YouTube. Here for example, is the coverage that they used 11 years ago when covering the Princess Diana tragedy:

This same story in America would have come with interviews, and possibly trying to get statements

I don't think that sensationalizing news is something that only America faces, but I do think that the media is far less imposing in Europe, allowing the public to make their own judgments. It's no secret, however, that, like most of the world, most of Europe and Australia (as I discovered last summer) aren't pleased with how things are going in Iraq, or with the Bush Administration. Over the next 15 weeks, we'll see if the BCC changes-- or if it will be the place for unbiased news.