(Anyone who watches cable news on a regular basis won't be surprised by anything that follows in the next paragraphs, I know, but along with a resolution to post more here on this blog, this has really touched a nerve with me for some reason.)
Kirsten Powers appears frequently on Fox News under the title of “political analyst.” It's her job, one would presume, to know information, synthesize it, and transmit it, with her opinions, to the public.
The rest of the exchange, courtesy of HotAir:
MATT SCHLAPP: It was a veto that was overridden by the Democrats. So, I give President Bush credit for vetoing that bill.
POWERS: No, it was a 2008 law. I mean, I don’t know what are talking about.
SCHLAPP: Yes, that became law over the president’s veto.
POWERS: No, that’s not true.
Except, of course, it appears to be true. President Bush did not support end-of-life counseling. Many congressional Republicans did – after all, the veto was overridden – but Bush himself did not. Now, it should be noted that everyone messes up on occasion. We've all said something stupid, or been called out for being mistaken.
But her response, via Twitter, reminds us why cable news is crap:
Without getting into the politics of the issues, it should be pointed out that this is a very easy-to-research fact. President Bush vetoed only a handful of bills over the course of his presidency.But instead of knowing this, or putting in the effort to look up her assertion on Thomas.loc.gov, Powers got her information from the exact same place that you and I get it: Print media (who also got it wrong).
If Powers is able to do her job by just reading the paper and regurgitating the information with a camera pointed at her, why should I be interested in what she has to say? Should her point of view – and the point of view of any of these other “analysts” - carry any extra weight?
i like to read your posts. thanks for this one.
Posted by: Devremülk | January 02, 2011 at 09:52 AM