Thanks for stopping by...

The whyioughtta blog has reached the end of its natural lifespan.

But you can still find me here and possibly here on occasion.

Best wishes!

CONGRATULATIONS USA!

A historical election's eve...and the media navelgazing has already begun

Am I alone in finding this type of editorial irritating? Our media in Canada does this all the time too. I'm not sure whether I can clearly articulate what bugs me, but it has something to do with these questions:

Aren't they maybe overestimating their impact on voters?
Aren't they sort of Bill Maher-ing the American public (i.e. assuming they're stupid media pawns)? (Don't get me wrong, I love Maher, but he's not always kind in his characterization of his countrymen).
What purpose does this whole 'liberal bias' question really serve except breeding pendulum-swinging disasters like Fox "News"?
Can you really compare Obama's gaffes to McCain's? (Personally, I think they PALIN comparison.)
Isn't it possible that Obama got more "favourable" coverage overall because he did fewer stupid things?

As for the whole 'liberal' thing...consider this if you're American: your 'liberal' candidate has pretty much the same political and social stance as our current conservative prime minister. And our PM, Stephen Harper, is a former Reformer--which was a party about as far to the right as you can get in Canada without being dismissed by the entire country as a total wing-nut. Obama might be left of your centre, but he's definitely not leftist or even, from our standards, that liberal. So I find the 'liberal bias' thing a little silly.

Mostly, though, I'm tired of the media constantly yakking about itself. Maybe the whole bias problem would be remedied if they spent more time focusing on reporting facts and less time editorializing everything--even their own editorials. It's a mise-en-abysme of self-obsession and it is, frankly, boring.