Mainstream media does not understand the Palin threat, again

Eager (and rightly so) to knock her out of the spotlight, pundits from most mainstream media sources (Fox News being one obvious exception) have repeatedly been predicting Sarah Palin's political demise.

Back when she resigned from her position as Governor of Alaska a year ago, most such media sources assumed that she'd soon disappear into oblivion. Of course now she is more popular than ever, and is a serious contender for the 2012 Republican Presidential nomination.

But now Newsweek is running this article that basically states that Ms. Palin's reputation is in danger because, uh, her daughter is going to appear on the reality television hit Dancing With The Stars.

Let me repeat that last part -- they believe that Bristol appearance on a hit television show is going to hurt Ms. Palin's reputation. I don't watch the show myself, but millions of Americans do. And from what I have seen and heard of it, it's essentially harmless fun. Yet somehow this appearance is going to do damage to Sarah's run for the presidency?

The article does go on to detail Bristol's more "scandalous" activities -- her pregnancy, her on-and-off engagements to Levi Johnston, and so forth. It then states the following:

In the end, family values matter a great deal to GOP primary voters. And, sooner or later, if Palin contemplates a White House run, they are likely to contrast Bristol’s antics with the wholesome image of Chelsea Clinton or, say, Mitt Romney’s five sons.

First off, I don't think GOP voters are thinking too much about Chelsea Clinton. But, more importantly, Newsweek clearly demonstrates that it does not understand the modern political landscape.

Yes, Mr. Romney might have a sweet-as-pie gaggle of sons, and you never see them on the covers of any gossip magazines. But that's the point -- you never see them. Many may find Bristol's antics unpalatable, but they keep her - and more importantly, her mother - in the media spotlight.

Barack Obama had his problems during his primary run with regards to his relationship with the Reverend Jeremiah Wright. It was an embarrassing situation. But you know what else the controversy did? It took the media's focus off of Hillary Clinton for long, long stretches. It reminded us that President Obama was an important candidate for the presidency.

Bristol's problems, moreover, are of the gossipy sort that few GOP voters would find as offensive as they did the words of Rev. Wright. Even if they do preach about family values, many Republican voters certainly enjoy indulging in the world of celebrity culture, as do so many Americans across the political spectrum. And whenever Bristol pulls off another stunt, we're all reminded that Sarah is around, just waiting to jump into the 2012 election pool.

We hate this guy...oh yeah, he wrote a book, too.

Newsweek, which already is in the running for the ugliest website offered by a mainstream media company, seems intent on taking the book review to new heights of absurdity.

First off there is their We Read It [So you don't have to] series of reviews, which summarize and cite the choicest bits from selected books so...well...you don't have to read them, I suppose. Thanks for telling us what to think and saving us from the trouble of engaging in the oh-so-boring exercise of reading, Newsweek!

Now today comes this article about Jonathan Franzen. Which goes on for three paragraphs about why we should hate the author for having opinions and being a touch eccentric. That would be fine enough, however, except that the final paragraph then veers into a miniature review of his latest work, Freedom.

This is sort of the sneak attack version of a book review. You thought you were reading a piece about an author? Surprise! We've thrown in a capsule review as well. I suppose this saves Newsweek the trouble of writing an actual review of the book...though I would have preferred it if they told us the best parts like they usually do, so we wouldn't actually have to read it.