Proposition: More Comprehensive Media Coverage of Issues

The election is over, but the reprecussions will continue throughout the upcoming years. The campaign coverage largely focused on the personalities of individual politicians instead of dealing with more complex platform issues. The coverage revealed a lack of substance, as audiences learned more about how much money Palin spent on clothes and how Obama and his wife engaged in fist bumps than they did about specific foreign diplomacy stances. Although it is now too late for the media to turn back time and provide more comprehensive news coverage, it is never too late to reflect and learn from mistakes. One of the most disturbing results of the election was the banning of gay marriage in three states (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/06/us/politics/06marriage.html?_r=1&scp=2&sq=gay%20marriage&st=cse&oref=slogin). Since people were wrapped up in the "American Idol"-esque popularity contest of political figures, they squandered their opportunity to express themselves through direct democracy.

Although it is very possible that the majority opinion prevailed and that most citizens in these states opposed gay marriage, the lack of publicity and debate surrounding the ballot propositions leads me to question whether people fully considered the results of their vote before casting their ballot. Many saw the election solely as a contest between McCain and Obama, meanwhile ignoring the significance of local races and propositions. Numerous people only voted for president and left the remainder of the ballot blank, because they did not take the time to search for information on the propositions and local candidates. Herein lies the problem: citizens should not have to search for comprehensive information on these ballot measures, because the media have a responsibility to make such knowledge readily available. It is fine that the New York Times is covering the gay marriage ban after the fact, but the lack of such coverage before the election, when it could have actually made a difference, is startling. Pages of newspapers were covered with glamorous photographs of McCain and Obama, while the actual issues were ignored or hidden in the back pages. This is particularly disturbing when considering the importance of direct democracy opportunities such as propositions on ballots. Arguably, such measures should receive more coverage than candidates because they directly influence policy instead without the filter of a politician. Likewise, local politicians often have a more direct impact on constituents, yet these races received minimal coverage. The silencing of real issues in the campaign coverage leading up to the election prevented many people from fully understanding the proposition initiatives and the potential impact of their vote. Now, the country has to live with those consequences.