Although both US presidential candidates are corporate-bought
outs (therefore eliminating any difference), its interesting to
note the difference in media coverage. While McCain/Palin was
regularly ridiculed for gaffs etc, which they deserved, it was as
if the Obama/Biden team got glowing media coverage. One Obama
slip-up where he referred to 57 states was glossed over. From the
monopolised media environment of the US, it seems clear who the
establishment favours.
Although its true that Obama got millions in individual
contributions, having galvanised a grassroots movement, it seems
pretty clear that the "Obama-fever" was created by favourable media
coverage (in fact, a primary determinant for any political figure)
and of course, his fine hypnotic (literally) oratory- of which,
Hitler also used to his advantage. I would like to think that
people are able to look beyond nice-sounding words like "Change"
(what kind?) and "yes we can" and focus on the issues. But
unfortunately, that is what media distractions are for preventing
right?
Obama never started out as a favorite and was never taken seriously
from the very beginning - which was in 2004, when he emerged from
the woodworks in his speech made on his first
appearance at the 2004 Democratic Convention.
In the recently concluded US Election Process, Obama was
given the slimmest of chance even to win the Primaries, and the
media had given Hillary Clinton as a better candidate to defeat
John McCain.
Obama-fever only set in when his message of "Change" sounded
more logicable in the light of the worsening economic
and foreign military situations with each passing day of
the months throughout the campaign.
It was only as the three public debates that allow the US
Electorates to view the two candidates under close public scrutiny
for their body-language, tone, and contents of their replies to the
various questions posed - that the opinions began to favor
Obama.
John McCain was handicapped by the records of George
Bush's Administration, and his no-win position was reluctantly
endorsed by the hard core of the Republican Party, and one can only
wonder if his decision for Paillin as his running mate was ever his
own choice.
The US Electorate that voted for Obama were not merely the shop
floor illiterate Union Workers, with the majority of the US
Electorates having received college or University education,
and are far more politically conscious than the apathic
Singaporeans of similar ages.
From the urban city workers to the rural
agricultural heartlanders, Obama supporters come from across a
wide cross-section of ethnic and racial groups, from all the
different religious and social groups, from young and old.
All who had voted Obama were those who have got tired
of George Bush's cowboy type gung-ho unilateral politics, which
was supported by an incompetent war mongering and oil
grabbing hands of Cheney - who was all the more
surprisingly disappointing for his experience expected to
provide guidance to "Georgie boy".
It is silly to compare the US Media enthralment in Obama
with the mass hysteria in the closed German Society that
Hitler mass media had stirred up - with the help of his Storm
Troopers to press-gang the German civilians to participate,
and with the state print and broadcast media dutifully publicising
the events.
To its credit of the US Mainstream Media has succeeded
in maintaining some degree of political independence from the
various political parties, as the machinery of the
US media simply depended on the subject of public
interests for its profitability.
This independence can be seen in the US Mainstream Media during
the publicity given to the Watergate Affair that resulted in
Nixon's downfall.
If anything at all, the US Mainstream Media has yet allowed
itself to be subjected by any jingoism to feed the
public fervor in any slanted ways.
