I'm sure most of you have heard about this rather recent Dan Rather's thing and maybe some of you would like to discuss it. But, NO! I don't care about the whole "political motivations" behind it. What my main gripe with the whole thing is what the media named it: Rathergate, and how this event shows an alarming decay in the character of the American media.
Why do multiple newer political/media scandal since Nixon's Watergate need to have the words "gate" or "water" in them? Sure, Whitewater was named Whitewater because Bernard Nussbaum removed documents concerning the Whitewater Development Corporation from the office of Vincent Foster. So that is excused, but Rathergate is NOT. There is no gate in this "scandal." There is a Rather but there are NO, I repeat, NO gates. What's next? Waterkerry?
Is this some sort of insult against Dan Rathers? What better way to insult Rather's than to liken his "scandal" to the scandal of a man he often showed contempt for, Nixon?
Or is it simply evidence of the quickly dwindling imagination and creativity in the media today? Every single news channel reports the same news and the same stories day in and day out. It's either about the war or about the upcoming election. While those may be the two most pressing issues in the United States today there are many other things they could be covering. Watching the news today is like being tied down and given the old chinese water torture.
Why the hell would you name this "scandal" Rathergate? Ok, it deals with Dan Rather, that's where the "Rather" comes from, but where does the gate come from? Does he live in a gated complex? Were they trying to make fun of the way he walks and just made a typo? Or are they using the definition of gate that means "To admit or turn (anything) for the purpose of shaping it," which would probably closest fit this situation, but he admitted he was wrong, so what exactly is he shaping? Besides, I doubt the single minded dim witted entity that is the American media has enough brainpower to even consider a somewhat liberal use of that definition.
Imagine the meeting room on this one, it probably went a little like this:
Media guy: So... Dan Rather's messed up. We should turn it into a huge scandal.
Media girl: Sounds like a plan, but we need some sort of catchy name for it.
Media guy: Dan's Bad Bonanza? Dan Dan the Bad Man? Forgery Anonymous?
Media girl: Noooo. Think about one of the largest political scandals that just happened to give us a watchdog function in politics today.
Media guy: Clinton getting a blowjob? I would have liked to watch that.
Media girl: NO! WATERGATE. Now, what I've cleverly done is replaced "Water" with "Rather" see, because both of them end with 'r' and have an 'a' and a 't' in them. oh oh and an 'e.' It's so perfect!
Media guy: Now I know why you're the boss.
I understand that the name was probably picked largely due to the fact that the stigma that Watergate, and probably anything-gate, will carry in order to tarnish Dan Rather's reputation further. So, media, I applaud you for your still sharp skills of defamation; but where is the creativity? I say if you're going to disgrace someone you should do it with style. They should have named it Hitler Rather, or Dan Rather: Keeper of Secrets or quite possibly, instead of focusing all of this animosity and negativity toward a single person, step back and look at the problem as a whole. Is Dan Rather the only biased reporter? No. Is he the only one that has knowingly kept facts from the public? Doubtful. Is he the only one that is the problem with today's media? No.
Rathergate? I'd rather not.
Why do multiple newer political/media scandal since Nixon's Watergate need to have the words "gate" or "water" in them? Sure, Whitewater was named Whitewater because Bernard Nussbaum removed documents concerning the Whitewater Development Corporation from the office of Vincent Foster. So that is excused, but Rathergate is NOT. There is no gate in this "scandal." There is a Rather but there are NO, I repeat, NO gates. What's next? Waterkerry?
Is this some sort of insult against Dan Rathers? What better way to insult Rather's than to liken his "scandal" to the scandal of a man he often showed contempt for, Nixon?
Or is it simply evidence of the quickly dwindling imagination and creativity in the media today? Every single news channel reports the same news and the same stories day in and day out. It's either about the war or about the upcoming election. While those may be the two most pressing issues in the United States today there are many other things they could be covering. Watching the news today is like being tied down and given the old chinese water torture.
Why the hell would you name this "scandal" Rathergate? Ok, it deals with Dan Rather, that's where the "Rather" comes from, but where does the gate come from? Does he live in a gated complex? Were they trying to make fun of the way he walks and just made a typo? Or are they using the definition of gate that means "To admit or turn (anything) for the purpose of shaping it," which would probably closest fit this situation, but he admitted he was wrong, so what exactly is he shaping? Besides, I doubt the single minded dim witted entity that is the American media has enough brainpower to even consider a somewhat liberal use of that definition.
Imagine the meeting room on this one, it probably went a little like this:
Media guy: So... Dan Rather's messed up. We should turn it into a huge scandal.
Media girl: Sounds like a plan, but we need some sort of catchy name for it.
Media guy: Dan's Bad Bonanza? Dan Dan the Bad Man? Forgery Anonymous?
Media girl: Noooo. Think about one of the largest political scandals that just happened to give us a watchdog function in politics today.
Media guy: Clinton getting a blowjob? I would have liked to watch that.
Media girl: NO! WATERGATE. Now, what I've cleverly done is replaced "Water" with "Rather" see, because both of them end with 'r' and have an 'a' and a 't' in them. oh oh and an 'e.' It's so perfect!
Media guy: Now I know why you're the boss.
I understand that the name was probably picked largely due to the fact that the stigma that Watergate, and probably anything-gate, will carry in order to tarnish Dan Rather's reputation further. So, media, I applaud you for your still sharp skills of defamation; but where is the creativity? I say if you're going to disgrace someone you should do it with style. They should have named it Hitler Rather, or Dan Rather: Keeper of Secrets or quite possibly, instead of focusing all of this animosity and negativity toward a single person, step back and look at the problem as a whole. Is Dan Rather the only biased reporter? No. Is he the only one that has knowingly kept facts from the public? Doubtful. Is he the only one that is the problem with today's media? No.
Rathergate? I'd rather not.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home