Trudy Lieberman has an interesting piece in the July/August issue of the Columbia Journalism Review remarking, ostensibly, on the similarities of the present Obama orchestrated healthcare fandango to the one that took place back in 1993.
"... It isn’t just that the debate is the same and the press isn’t acknowledging it—the coverage actually suggests that things are different. “Not Yesterday’s Health Fight”, read the headline on an April column by The Washington Post’s E. J. Dionne. ..."
Trudy Lieberman
Groundhog Day
July/August 2009
Columbia Journalism Review
So why is it that:
"As in the early nineties, the press is covering the process of [healthcare] reform, not the substance.
Trudy Lieberman
Groundhog Day
July/August 2009
Columbia Journalism Review
I wonder if it really matters - process or substance? I wonder if the average media consumer would welcome substance? Wouldn't knowing the real elements of a matter maybe require wondering what could be best? The busy modern world might just be more complex and demanding. Better to leave it to those that understand the detail of the stuff?
Anyway, it's nice to know that, what some of us call, the corporate media hasn't really changed all that much since the Clinton's tried their busy little hands at reforming the US health industry monster.
___________________________
*Apologies to Yogi
Technorati Tags: Media, Healthcare
