Barack Obama is being labelled by the media a charismatic leader and Hillary Clinton isn’t. Clinton’s campaign has been reduced to small rallies, no money in the war chest, organizational chaos and 11 straight losses.
Clinton has now stooped to play her final card — gender.
If you can’t galvanize the public, it’s time to galvanize the Sisterhood. Suddenly, feminist commentators are abuzz with the notion that media coverage of Clinton’s campaign is sexist. It’s been described as “sociopathic woman-hating.” One astute observer says coverage is, “akin to a pack of rabid seventh graders trying to haze the nerdy girl in school simply because they can. It has nothing to do with her qualifications — it has to do with her gender.”
That does indeed sound sociopathic. But is it true?
Clinton has some legitimate complaints, but most relate to Chris Matthews, host of the highly rated political talk show, Hardball. He has reportedly referred to Clinton as “she-devil,” “witchy,” “fickle,” and is infamous for having said she “pimped” out her daughter in the campaign, and her laugh is a “cackle.”
Can you get more sexist than using terms like cackle and fickle? (He’s also called her a “fraud” for claiming to be a Yankees fan. I’m not sure this is a key point in her platform but, judging from the resulting fury, it might be.)
Yes, these remarks are sexist and rude. But they are from one man. Based on Matthews’ treatment of other guests, such remarks seem to be in his job description.
Beyond that, the gender hazing includes a man who stood up at a rally to shout “Iron my Shirt” while holding a sign declaring the same. Clinton’s first comment at this week’s debate was to whine about the conspiracy that has her answering the opening question at most debates. Frankly, with a start like that, who cares what words follow?
Obama could also play the sexism card. When US magazine asked whether he wears boxers or briefs, he refused to answer and called the question, “humiliating.” Would the media dare ask Hillary to reveal her bra size or the cut of her panties?
Let’s face it, what the Clinton campaign is really upset about is the media swoon over Obama and their growing willingness to give him a free pass to the winner’s circle.
One media study found 58 per cent of Clinton stories were negative, while 61 per cent about Obama were positive. Obama’s positive coverage has since increased to 84 per cent. Of course, only one in five stories (20 per cent) relates to policy. Perhaps that’s why Clinton is able to get such traction for her charges of sexism — there’s nothing else to talk about.
Indeed, the American media seem to be attracted to something new and fresh in Obama — whether it is connected to anything substantive seems unimportant.
Obama is typically portrayed as charismatic, inspirational, unifying and a driver for positive change. In contrast, Clinton is referred to as tough, ambitious, smart, politically connected and a “rhymes with witch.”
Chances are that bias will still be around if the final race is between Obama and John McCain. Obama is new; McCain has been around forever. Does that entitle McCain to play the Old White Man discrimination card?
The media aren’t always fair. Opposing candidates are rarely judged by the same stick.
Just ask how George Bush felt when Dan Rather and CBS deliberately smeared his National Guard service record on forged documents and claims they knew couldn’t be substantiated.
Last week, the media accused McCain of dallying with a female lobbyist. The New York Times went ahead with the piece just to stir up public discussion and doubts. Would the Times have run any such story about a Democratic candidate? Not likely.
Clinton isn’t so naive as to believe the news is anything but biased. Using the media to one’s advantage is a deliberate campaign strategy. She utilized that bias when her party — and the media — was ready to proclaim her as the Democratic candidate.
Does she remember when her hubby was president and CNN meant the “Clinton News Network?” And when she and Bill used the press to demolish the reputations of Monica Lewinsky, Gennifer Flowers and other accusers?
The news is often biased. It’s just that no one ever objects when they are on the winning side and the bias is in their favour.
- Defender to defendant - Saturday January 29, 2011 at 9:16 am
- Grief or glamour? - Saturday January 22, 2011 at 8:24 am
- Forget blame game - Saturday January 15, 2011 at 7:48 am
