The Media Attacks: Sarah Palin

I sometimes go to a website called Watching America, it features articles from pundits around the world. More often than not, they have no clue what they are talking about. Most of it is drivel, yet sometimes an article I come across is spot on. It captures the American political scene better than the entire commentary page of the NY Times (though that's not saying much). Today I found one of those articles. Marcin Bosacki explores the witch hunt like atmosphere the media has been having with VP candidate Sarah Palin.

Anyway, we should give credit to American media for giving us more information about the candidate for vice presidency. However, the problem occurs when reporters (not commentators!) start acting as if there was only one just cause to fight for; when they are trying to make Palin look less experienced and more extreme than she really is.

On Thursday night when ABC News broadcast an interview with Palin, several very important Internet websites, including ABC itself and “San Francisco Chronicle”, immediately posted comments such as: “Palin would support war with Russia” (only some added “if Russia attacks”).

The question in fact referred to the defense of Georgia, if it were a NATO member. Palin said, as it is stated in the NATO treaty, that the Allies and the USA should protect Georgia.

Nonetheless, Campbell Brown from CNN instructed Palin with a malicious smile on her face that after Russia attacked Georgia McCain himself rejected the idea of war.

Talk about distortion. The WaPo article is even worse (insinuating that Palin was connecting Iraq today to 9/11). When outright lies are used in titles, you have to think whether or not there is an agenda going on.

For the most part, most of the world's media doesn't have a clue when it comes to American politics, but Marcin Bosacki is spot on.