On balance, I hope the negative and positive impact of the media will be relatively neutral, not taking down the better candidate for the sake of infotainment', but that may just be wishful dreaming.

The media has, but often shirks, responsibility for accuracy in favor of hyperbole. If someone makes an innocent gaff, as McCain did, recently (and others), it may be the media's job to report it. Where the potential harm comes is in playing and re-playing it until McCain looks ridiculous. I chose his accidental misstatement where he referred to himself as a liberal (maybe Freudian) because the media did play that one relatively straight, not making it a spectacle.

Remember when they didn't use such responsible judgment, showing Dukakis in a tank, wearing a helmet that made him look ridiculous? It may have cost Dukakis the election; maybe Dukakis cost himself the election; I won't debate that.

Which brings me to my point: My point is, there can be huge negative impact on elections if we allow media to control our perceptions of our candidates. How can we not let media have a negative impact on the elections? They're in our face 24/7 with commentary, news alerts, films of candidates making mistakes in judgment in their choices of words, etc. It's not just newspapers and television, but it's on our computers when we fire it up to work in the mornings, on our blackberries, iPhones, and laptops while we drink our five dollar coffees from paper cups.

If "Bill O'Really?" says there are no homeless veterans sleeping under bridges and on grates to keep warm, and offers to pay for their shelter if anyone can find them, we should hold him accountable to his word. If he shirks on keeping his word, we should quit watching and listening to him; not letting him influence our thinking or decision making about the election. I pick on "Bill O'Really?" because he epitomizes, for me, the media that wants to have as much negative impact on the elections as possible. It's what he gets paid to do. If media, like Fox with Bill, can make it all seem dismal and hopeless, they win. They know that those who believe their garbage, disguised as news', will vote, and those who don't believe their garbage will stay home if they can depress us, sufficiently.

If the media has a negative impact on the elections, it's because we allow it and deserve it. We either think for ourselves, or buy what others decide for us. So, the question isn't mine to answer; it's yours.

Learn more about this author, Will Kester.
Click here to send author comments or questions.

---

Add your voice

Know something about US elections 2008: Assessing the media's negative impact on the campaign?
We want to hear your view. Write now!