Sign in to wowOwow

Enter the email address that you used when registering at wowOwow.
The password field is case sensitive. Click here if you have forgotten your password.

Please register for wowOwow

Newsletter subscriptions
Sign up to receive wowOwow's weekly newsletter and get our best picks delivered right to your inbox. Our newsletter content is hand-picked by the wowOwow editorial team and provides the top features, news, and commentary from our site. Subscribing to our newsletter is free and safe. We will never share your email or other information with a third-party without your direct consent.
By registering, you indicate that you have read and agree
with our privacy policy and terms of service.

Conversation | 05/02/2008 12:00 am

Marlo Thomas: The Media Steals Our Chances of a Fair Election

© Shutterstock

JOAN: Does the deliberate dumbing down of the news have the same effect as censorship, by cutting the public off from information that we need to make our decisions?

MARY: I say this as an old advertising pro: The news is for sale. The news is just a factor, like entertainment. The ultimate person who is responsible for whether the news is good, bad or indifferent is the viewer, because if the news is not good, fewer and fewer people will watch it.

LILY: People didn’t used to try to make money on the news. We lived through an era when the networks prided themselves on their news department.

MARY: Yes. That may be true.

LILY: Not because it was a money maker.

MARY: The news around this election has been particularly obnoxious, idiotic. But you’re getting the news that is essentially what most of the people are willing to pay for, or what they want. I know that sounds vastly oversimplified. But it is a fact.

LILY: Look how many good people they have destroyed just by petty humiliations. There’s nothing worse in this culture than being discounted or laughed at. They destroyed Gore. They destroyed Kerry as any kind of viable candidate, just by making fun of him windsurfing.

MARLO: Look what they did to Hillary, from the very beginning. With her headband, and her not wanting to bake cookies. My God, you would have thought this woman had robbed a bank.

JOAN: There was this great op-ed piece by Elizabeth Edwards where she wrote that what we’re getting, “what is left, is the Cliffs Notes of the news, or what I call strobe-light journalism.” As intelligent women, when you turn on the American news, do you desperately watch to try and find something? Or do you go on the Internet instead?

MARLO: I always think that if I read enough stuff, possibly somewhere in the middle I’ll find the truth. But the Joe Klein article in Time was so interesting. And he said we get this low-level information and use it as news. You know — what Barack’s bowling score is. All this foolish stuff — what Hillary was wearing and what Bill Clinton said to a guy on the street. But nothing about the issues, nothing about what’s happening to this country, nothing about the war. The war is now on page 18. Iraq is, I think, now on the back of the paper. And we’re not interested in it. And today Bush is all excited about his $600 rebate. A $600 rebate is going to make up, he says, for the gas prices. How far will $600 take you?

JOAN: About 20 miles.

MARLO: And people buy it.

JOAN: Do you think there’s a will behind this deliberate stupidity of information that we’re being given?

MARY: That it’s manipulative?

JOAN: Not only treating the public with contempt but actually —

MARLO: Withholding. Yes, I think they’re withholding.

JOAN: As in, “If we tell them all about Barack’s score – bowling score – they won’t pay attention to anything else.”

MARY: Why don’t we do something about it? I mean, it is possible to do something about it, if we’re really that interested. Why don’t we band together and simply stop it? After the last election, which was certainly questionable, we just accepted — I mean, we are an accepting country.

MARLO: I asked Bill Clinton, at a dinner party, why he and the first George Bush didn’t go to Steve Jobs and Bill Gates, and ask them to come up with a foolproof way that our elections would be fair and honest.

JOAN: Brilliant.

272 Reader Comments (so far…) Sign In or Register to comment

Lauriate Roly
Marlo: I certainly agree with you. You are absolutely right. (and you’re great. Just like somebody else I think of whenever I see or hear about you…do you remember the line, “Make room for Danny”)?
By Lauriate Roly on 05/02/2008 11:33 am
Suzanne O
The news is more entertainment than real news. We get WAY too much information about young starlets acting out, what is news worthy about Obama bowling or Hillary drinking ? I want to know what their plan is for solving our economic problems,the war and health care. Are there solutions to these problems ? Can they be solved ? Can we afford to wait until a new president is elected ? It is amazing to me the number of people that believe an email that went around that says Obama is a muslim. I find few people that have watched even one debate. Marlo why don’t you and Phil team up and bring us the facts that we need to know ? I agree with some of the other comments about violence, language and crude humor in movies and tv.
By Suzanne O on 05/02/2008 11:51 am
Dusty Mills
Has anyone else seen the interview that CNN’s Suzanne Mavout (sp) did with Michelle Obama and Caroline Kennedy? Right off, Ms.Obama was hit with the Pastor Wright melodrama. It’s as if there is nothing of more substance in the Obama campaign than what this attention-grabbing, “I am not the problem” small-minded with a huge ego, little gnat in the life of a future president. Ms. Obama was so uncomfortable and tried to steer the conversation away from Wright, but the “reporter” just wasn’t going to let it go. I wanted to hear what Ms. Obama and Ms. Kennedy had to say, but I am so tired of how the news outlets (even CNN) steer the talk to the current scandal of the day, to who said what about someone else, and what is your response to the latest poll which shows no one likes the expensive socks you wear because they make you look like an elitist. Is anyone really buying into this stuff, are a politicians socks or a pantsuit more important than what GWB has done to this country for the last 8 years?? Well, at least Suzanne had the conscious to look embrassed at the expression on the face of Ms.Obama as she asked one silly question after the other on a subject of obvious distaste or should I say “poor taste”, all in the name of ratings. Is this really the best way to stay informed?
By Dusty Mills on 05/02/2008 12:02 pm
Susan Chick
Why can’t we have a nationwide primary, all on the same day? It’s the only fair way for citizens to choose from all the candidates. I don’t know who decided that Iowa or NH get to vote first. It would save a lot of time and money, and then the top two vote-getters from each party could campaign in the “semi-finals” — or decide to be together on the party ticket. And we would avoid the obnoxious “mud-slinging” from the candidates that fuel the media circus. Why does everything have to be so complicated?
By Susan Chick on 05/02/2008 12:06 pm
Suzanne O
I agree with Susan Chick, a nationwide primary would be wonderful, get it done in one day and move on ! The money spent on a campaigning is appalling and it goes on and on !
By Suzanne O on 05/02/2008 12:45 pm
Suzanne O
Sorry, my computer went crazy !
By Suzanne O on 05/02/2008 12:48 pm
Mugsy Peabody
I was just wondering, Suzanne O, do you agree with Susan Chick?
By Mugsy Peabody on 05/02/2008 2:17 pm
E .
LOL Suzanne O I thought you might be stuck in Stepford, Ct with Paula Prentiss!
By E . on 05/02/2008 2:41 pm
Esther Bradley-DeTally
Well, after some belabored thought, I think she does Mugsy!
By Esther Bradley-DeTally on 05/02/2008 3:40 pm
Elizabeth Bennett
I think it would require a Constitutional amendment to do that. Plus, as a practical matter, the only way candidates could campaign for a national primary is through the very media we are complaining is focused on the wrong things. We would get more breast cancer stories, misspeaking pastors stories and so forth, and much less policy. My wish is that the primaries were actual primaries and not caucuses, and that the delgates were bound to a first ballot vote, not free to change their position. There is also a good argument for cumulative voting or ranked voting, where one’s second choice is given some credit in counting votes, in the event that there are a number of candidates. I have been exasperated for years that the Sunday political shoes seem to discuss nothing but the horserace. Maybe the pundits are too lazy to bone up on actual policy.
By Elizabeth Bennett on 05/02/2008 4:07 pm
mary lou s
yes, elizabeth, ranked voting on a national primary day in the summer before the fall election.
By mary lou s on 05/02/2008 7:14 pm
Frannie Em
Susan, it is too hard for the candidates, because they need to make campaign stops and meet people, find out what issues concern them etc. I think like 3 different primaries - go from west to east or something and get it over with. One thing though, don’t forget how astounding this election is a serious female candidate and a serious African American candidate, as well as more people registering to vote. I see the glass half full.
By Frannie Em on 05/02/2008 11:17 pm
Susan Chick
But if they’re running for President, shouldn’t they already know the issues? Most of the candidates already hold some sort of public office which is supposed to keep them in touch with their constituents. They should present their platform (preferably in writing!), have a few debates between all the candidates of each party, and then let everybody vote. In this day and age, citizens don’t actually have to meet the candidates, just hear their views.
By Susan Chick on 05/03/2008 9:56 pm
wild heather
I’m so glad you said it, Susan: Why does everything have to be so complicated? A book was recommended to me that I went to the library to find and I’m just starting to read it. It’s called “Our Undemocratic Constitution” by Sanford Levinson. I think it will be very helpful in my effort to educate myself about all the challenging topics I am encountering on wowOwow.
By wild heather on 05/03/2008 6:05 am
Maurine H
Thanks for the most critical discussion on Wow to date! Yes! the media sell-out and deliberate distortion of facts is appalling, and Yes! the public has been watching and listening to “news” that insults our intelligence. If we women on Wow could actually place some pressure on the media to report relevant facts and not pap, this website would be a model for others to form and do the same. (Remembering, of course, that we’re fighting Goliath.) Once I discovered that I could access international news on the internet, I started reading English language versions from Europe, Asia, and the Middle East. What an eye-opener! (Even better if you can read the non-English versions). How the U.S. is perceived by the rest of the world is painful and revealing—makes our media look like the propaganda machine it has become. Whatever Wow comes up with to counteract the corporate stranglehold on the media and the falacious content of the “news”…sign me up to help! “I’m mad as hell and I’m not going to take it anymore!”
By Maurine H on 05/02/2008 12:10 pm