The fall of Tom Daschle and the rise of public man
February 7th, 2009I picked up Jay Rosen’s link to a TV interview with BIll Moyers, which focused on the recent mini-crisis of Tom Daschle’s nomination to be head of Health and Human services.
And I picked up the FT this morning to find an editorial about the incident too. The FT also points to the fact that Daschle had unpaid taxes and that was the cause of the problem.
However, Rosen and Greenwald point to the fact that what makes this a bigger story is indeed the fact that Daschle had been peddling his contacts and influence to organisations and companies, in exchange for large amounts of cash, to enable them to get through Congress legislation that would directly benefit them, which not necessarily be in the public good. This in their view is the bigger story, but because the practice is institutionalised within Washington, it is not regarded as ‘the story’.
Funny that, and of course we had the whole ‘cash for questions’ issue in the UK, and then recently four Lords again using their influence, so it is claimed, to change legislation to the benefit of companies in exchange for large amounts of cash.
Again, we see symptoms of perhaps a bigger malaise… which is in fact not being reported on in the mainstream media.
In Audience Atomization Overcome Rosen writes
In the age of mass media, the press was able to define the sphere of legitimate debate with relative ease because the people on the receiving end were atomized connected “up” to Big Media but not across to each other. And now that authority is eroding.
This ability to connect, to go round, over, under and through what were for years barriers to information are the means by which we challenge the authority of mainstream media.
In a long conversation with a friend of mine yesterday, we talked about trust. In a networked society, the ability to reach out and search for information in a non-linear fashion destroys the information fuedalism we have lived in for so long. As modern day serfs to the feudal lords of mass media, and mass consumption, we have discovered our sense of civic pride, because we can once again re-engage with the world in a way that creates meaning for us.
This is a problem for mainstream media, because that is not part of their DNA. The problem then is that trust erodes and over time that equates to the erosion of revenues. The big media boys then do the obvious, they cut staff, they slash budgets – just look at the Johnston Press in the UK. And as they begin to bleed cash on a quarterly basis, they continue to do more of the same.
Not realising that they are approaching this in the wrong way. And how could they? How could they be able to look upon the world with fresh eyes?
In the meantime, individuals when connected, reconnected, superconnected, begin to see that re-engaging in the public sphere might be a good thing and so the reinvent the world a new. Citizen journalism being but one aspect of that. So we see the rise of Pro-publica, Globalpost and the Huffingtonpost, as just 3 examples
My view is that, as a consequence of this shift in authority, companies have to ask themselves about the role of their organisation in public life. How do they do good? How do they bring perceived value? And how on earth do they build trust?
(No Ratings Yet)
Loading ...Posted in: Citizen journalism, Culture, Economics, Engagement Civil Society, Ethics, Government & Politics, Law, Media, News, Newspapers, Participation, Politics, Society, Trends
Listen to Alan at SXSW
4 Responses to “The fall of Tom Daschle and the rise of public man”
By Tim on Feb 7, 2009
Hi Alan – the shift in authority is a very interesting territory to research and discuss. It is the whole question of empowerment.
Regarding the changes in the media you may be interested in the latest series of the Money Programme where Janet Street-Porter is giving her overview (as only she can!!)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00hglw6/Money_Programme_Media_Revolution_Stop_Press/
A written piece on the same subject is at:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7872154.stm
What fascinated me was the (wholesale?) movement of newspapers to on-line services and the suggested readership of 7 million pairs of eyeballs in the US for the Guardian which Rusbridger was aiming to monetized somehow in the near future.
By Bruce Majors on Feb 7, 2009
For immediate release
Obama Appoints Anthony to Bureau of Maternal and Child Health
February 7, 2009 Washington DC
President Barack Obama appointed Casey Anthony today to the position of Director of the Bureau of Maternal and Child Health in a well-attended ceremony in the White House.
“This is another of Obama’s brilliant appointments,” commented Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. “Clearly Ms. Anthony knows that it takes a village to raise a child. We look forward to working with her on international programs for population control.”
House Majority Leader Nancy Pelosi seconded Secretary Clinton’s enthusiam: “It is not only important that we have appointed the first female head of the Bureau, but we have appointed someone who understands the crucial importance of fully funding retroactive reproductive choice services. Our health care professionals face serious unemployment and fully funding these services will put Americans back to work, as well as help us with cost containment in education and other social service budgets.”
In an article on “Obama’s New Feminism,” in this Sunday’s “New York Times” magazine, long-time observor of the Washington social scene Sally Quinn praised the Casey Anthony appointment for its practicality. “For too long Republicans from Bush to McCain have pursued a wild west, laissez-faire approach to their female cabinet and other appointments, selecting women like Karen Hughs and Sarah Palin without regard to whether they had family responsibilities. President Obama returns us to the Democratic wisdom of Clinton appointees like Janet Reno and Donna Shalala who are unencumbered by family obligations, and can truly be examples for young women. From Governor Napolitano to the more maverick case of Casey Anthony, by hook or by crook, these women will do what needs to be done to make sure that they can devote their entire energies to the public weal.”
Asked at the subsequent press conference whether Ms. Anthony’s legal difficulties might prove an embarassment to the Obama administration, White House Spokesman Robert Gibbs said: “Republicans are, um, trying to make, um, something of Ms. Anthony’s, um, innocent mistake of confusing chloroform, um, with the mosquito repellent “Off!” This is, um, a shameless, um, distraction from our, um, important stimulus bill. And it, um, won’t work. We won!” Mr. Gibbs added that an Obama council of advisors including Robert Reich, Paul Krugman, and Doc, Sneezy, Sleepy, Grumpy, Happy, Bashful, and Dopey disputed recent figures cited by House Republicans on infant mortality from the Congressional Budget Office.
Mr. Gibbs then ended the press conference abruptly, referring further questions to Assistant Press Secretary Moe Locke.
– 30 –
Copyright 2009 by Bruce P.Majors
By Alan Moore on Feb 8, 2009
Tim I think that this is what the next book should be about. This shift in authority is what is really important here.
Not whether, its 2.0, social media blah blah.
What do you think?