|
By Danny Schechter MediaChannel.org
New York, May 22,
2006 — Explain this to me: Why do so few of our TV “journalists”
and political reporters seem interested in all the questions
that have been raised about the integrity of our voting system?
Voting is at the heart of our democracy. Billions of dollars
are spent on political campaigns, and tens of millions are spent
on covering them. All the networks have election units complete
with pollsters, analysts and experts up the kazoo. All of them
sound authoritative and spice their commentary with personal
war stories and a parade of insider anecdotes.
Just tune in to the news any election night and you have to
marvel at all the space age technology, fancy graphics and computer
assisted projections. The anchors seem to know as much about
the history of voting percentages in each Congressional district
as fanatical baseball fans recall earned run averages or the
speed of each pitch.
Just like there are at least 10 military men and women backing
up each soldier in the field, there are dozens of political
aides, advisors, interns and hangers on “supporting”…
our elected politicians, or is it poli-trikians? Handicapping
elections is one of their specialties and they know most of
the races and players by heart.
Compared to corporate machinations, or even military-industrial
decisions, politics is over-covered, and yet the actual process
of voting—the machines, the counting, the verification,
and the questions raised by well informed journalists and analysts
about voting fraud seem to bore the punditocracy.
I know this because I made a film, “Counting on Democracy,”
about what actually happened in Florida during one of the most
controversial elections in our history, with Gore winning the
popular vote and Bush winning the election. 175,000 votes went
uncounted. Once it was decided that the GOP won, most of the
media lost interest. Very few journalists looked into what the
American Civil Liberties Union called “the tyranny of
small decisions” that affected the vote.
A media review of the outcome was postponed for months and
came to convoluted conclusions, although “The New York
Times” reporter who led the review told me they found
that Gore had won. However, that’s not what his own newspaper
reported in a story that was so dense that it was hard to understand
what it was saying. It was one of those pieces where the headline
said one thing, the text something else.
Everyone agreed that the election process was broken, but there
was little media attention paid to how to fix it. Once fancy
new electronic voting machines appeared on the scene, many journalists
seemed to promulgate the idea of “crisis over” because,
in their world view, technology solves all problems. Perhaps
that’s because so many of them think they are tech savvy
and rely on computers every day. Yet concerns about a paper
trail and verification are shunted aside, as such issues are
taken seriously only by the grumpy or conspiratorial among us.
Fast forward to 2004. I was covering the Democratic Convention
in Boston. So were Michael Moore and Greg Palast and several
others who were concerned that the 2004 election could become
a repeat of 2000. I attended a breakfast at the Florida delegation,
who assured me that their problems most decidedly had not been
fixed. Palast, who studied the way felons and others were disenfranchised
in 2000, warned that those forces who want to fix our elections
were more sophisticated than ever. Everyone expressed concerns
that Ohio could turn into the Florida of 2004. Oddly, the Democratic
Party and its candidate didn’t take the concerns seriously,
or prepare for the predicted eventualities. It was business
as usual.
We filmed the concerns being expressed in Boston with no response,
and then for “Balance” went to the GOP love fest
in New York, where we were told there was nothing to worry about.
We edited a new beginning to our award winning film “Counting
on Democracy” and went back to the Independent Television
Service, which helped to fund the film and got it on PBS to
see if public television stations would re-broadcast it.
To our surprise, not one would. It is as if the fiasco in Florida
had been forgotten. That’s right, not one station would
broadcast it. That’s a ZERO response to a film that had
been well received just four years earlier with millions saying
then ‘we will never forget Flori-duh.’ How quickly
we forgot! It was if there had been a national outbreak of media-fed
amnesia.
And then, as predicted in 2004, came the calamity in Ohio.
Concerns with ballot rigging and other methods used to dampen
Democratic turn-out were briefly noted and barely pursued or
covered. John Kerry seemed bullied into accepting an outcome
that many had doubts about. More recently, accounts from across
the country of breakdowns in electronic voting machines were
glossed over. All were reported locally but, together, never
aggregated to become the kind of national story and scandal
they should be.
Bob Fitrakis and Harvey Wasserman, who follow this story closely
and wrote a book about what really went down in Ohio, commented
in a recent story in the Free Press published in Columbus, “there
has been barely a whiff of coverage in the major media about
any problems with the electronic voting machines.”
The public, on the other hand, not only believes that there
are problems but many insist that the elections were stolen.
Write Wasserman and Fitrakis: “A recent OpEdNews.com/Zogby
People's poll of Pennsylvania residents, found that '39 percent
said that the 2004 election was stolen. Fifty-four percent said
it was legitimate. But let’s look at the demographics
on this question. Of the people who watch FOX news as their
primary source of TV news, one half of one percent believe it
was stolen and 99 percent believe it was legitimate. Among people
who watched ANY other news source but FOX, more felt the election
was stolen than legitimate. The numbers varied dramatically.'”
“Here, from that poll, are the stations listed as first
choice by respondents and the percentage of respondents who
thought the election was stolen: CNN 70 percent; MSNBC 65 percent;
CBS 64 percent; ABC 56 percent; Other 56 percent; NBC 49 percent;
FOX 0.5 percent.
“With 99 percent of FOX viewers believing that the election
was “legitimate,” only the constant propaganda of
Rupert Murdoch’s Disinformation campaign stands in the
way of a majority of Americans coming to grips with the reality
of two consecutive stolen elections.”
Bi-partisan Commissions have studied this problem. One led
by ex-president Jimmy Carter and former Secretary of State James
Baker noted: “Software can be modified maliciously before
being installed into individual voting machines. There is no
reason to trust insiders in the election industry any more than
in other industries."
A recent “Wall Street Journal” story revealed,
"Some former backers of the technology seek return to paper
ballots, citing glitches, fraud fears."
Aviel Rubin, a computer science professor at Johns Hopkins
University, did an analysis of the security flaws in the source
code for Diebold touch-screen machine. After studying the latest
problems, “The New York Times” reported Rubin said:
"I almost had a heart attack. The implications of this
are pretty astounding."
Worse still, the Congress is burying reform measures with scant
media attention. Chellie Pingree, president of Common Cause
writes: “What is Congress doing? Nothing. Right now HR
550, The Voter Confidence and Increased Accessibility Act the
bill, which would take care of these problems, is languishing
in committee. The bill has 186 cosponsors, more support than
most bills voted on in the House.”
Stories like this just dribble out with little follow-up and
less investigation. Isn’t the threat to democracy here
self-evident and worthy of more media attention? The press has
a long tradition of skepticism. Have they become skeptical about
the workings of democracy itself? Why has the heart of our democratic
process become such a ‘ho-hummer.”
Don’t they realize the truth, expressed by one of our
Mediachannel readers Donna Perlmutter, who writes: “Without
free, fair elections, nothing else matters.”
— News Dissector Danny Schechter is "blogger in chief" of Mediachannel.org. His new books and film are listed at
at www.newsdissector.org/store.htm
Comments to Dissector@mediachannel.org
=
= = = = = =
SUBSCRIBE
to
Media Savvy, MediaChannel's free daily news update.
= = = = = = =
SUPPORT
MediaChannel's
2006 campaign by donating to MediaChannel.org
= = = = = = =
RETURN
to
MediaChannel's Homepage
= = = = = = =
|