COMM 4020 Political Communication blog

http://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/yes-ted-cruz-was-born-canada-so-what-n329516

Yes, Ted Cruz Was Born in Canada. So What?

Less than twelve hours after Senator Ted Cruz’ announcement as an official contender for the presidency of the United States, familiar questions of nationality began pouring in; this annoying distraction was an all too familiar rant reminiscent of Donald Trump’s attacking quarry of President Obama’s birth citizenship.  In the article written by Carrie Dann of NBC News, she reports on the interview of Senator Cruz by FOX News host Sean Hannity, “You were born in Calgary, in Canada,” glancing into the camera for an apologetic chuckle. “Is there a birth certificate issue?” The senator explains that he is the son of a natural-born American mother and  he was born in Canada. The article goes into great detail to derail the American public’s concern over this issue by stating the many politicians whose citizenship was in question (most recently our President) and yet were dispelled. However, the interesting part is that Senator Cruz announced that he only discovered in 2013 that he held a dual citizenship with Canada, and quickly relinquished. It is interesting to correlate the information in Denton and Kuypers’ Politics and Communication in America’s chapter 9 on Presidential Campaigns. The argument that, “ the formal criteria for becoming president as set forth in Article 11, Section 1 of the Constitution are threefold: natural born citizen, at least 35 years old, and a resident of the United States for 14 years” (p201). The interview clearly states that Senator Cruz is a natural born citizen; however, it does not clarify how to determine the legality of his dual citizenship for the past 42 years. As stated in the textbook, the requirements for presidency have made substantial changes since WWII, and yet the average American citizen still has no clear explanation about the candidate’s basic requirements. I think this speaks more to our willingness to go with the popular vote rather than actually following our own written constitution; many of the voters remain misinformed or simply no longer care about the United States Constitution as it stands.

We all know that there is heavy bias in various media outlets. In the article “Stopping the next Tom Cotton stunt before it starts” the author, Steve Benen goes into discussing what Senator Tom Cotton and others wrote to the Iranian government. Essentially, they wrote that whatever negotiations that Obama and Iran agree to will not be binding when the next President takes office. As one can imagine, this angered many politicians from both houses of the legislature. In Chapter Six of Politics and Communication in America, Kuypers and Denton, Jr. write about bias and more specifically, coverage bias. They also write that news stories reported by national networks tend to lean towards a more liberal bias. As we all have observed, msnbc is no stranger to liberal media bias. Some reporters write with “statement bias” where they put their own opinions into reporting. In this article, Benen writes that “47 GOP lawmakers tried to sabotage American foreign policy.” This is an instance of coverage bias. We don’t need to go into the fact that there is already a long history of both parties in both houses freely contacting foreign leaders with their own agendas. Benen also shows his opinion in statement bias by alleging that Cotton and other GOP leaders made a serious mistake. This article from msnbc.com is a good example of coverage bias.

Senator Ted Cruz from Texas was the first to announce his bid for the presidential run in 2016. As an announcement speech goes Cruz came out rather explicit and forceful in regards to issues and his agenda as he declared his bid at Liberty University in Virginia. If you were looking for a traditional more value presented announcement speech, this is not what Cruz delivered. At the front end of the senators speech he came out with a clear agenda to repeal Obamacare and secure our borders. Both issues that would perhaps been better left to comment on at a later date. After the rhetoric of agenda Cruz focused on what I call his his ‘John Lennon’ inspired speech segment. The the theme here was Cruz and what he imagined. Imagine a president that follows the constitution, imagine a president that secures our borders, ect……. At which point I didn’t know if i wanted to damn the current administration or just relax and listen to an old Beatles album. Besides the mixed message of political concerns I did manage to comprehend his use of the word liberty. Perhaps used to energize the crowd seeing he was at Liberty University however the only part of his speech I feel was best suited for a presidential announcement. Of course i wasn’t the only one to be critical of this rather non-traditional speech tactic. Most all major networks expressed their critical view in regards to Cruz’s delivery. As for a more traditional ending Cruz did bring out his wife and children to give us all that family man appeal and emotional input. Please read the link below from Fox news on this subject. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/03/23/sen-ted-cruz-to-announce-plans-for-presidential-bid/

In chapter 7 (The Internet Influence Online Political News and Political Discourse) we read how the internet has changed the way the public views politics and the candidates. It is noted in that chapter that with the Howard Dean campaign, the internet and social media helped to make political campaigns a means to better inform the public and a force to be reckoned with.  This article on CNN News explains how President Obama has made a huge changed in this area.  The story starts off explaining that President Obama has named Shailagh Murray as his new Senior Adviser, prior to this post she was the Communication Director to Vice President Biden.  In her new role she will be advising the president in many areas helping to cut through all the Washington noise and focus on matters that concern everyday Americans.  She will do this in several ways, one is with help from public opinion polls like we spoke of in chapter 8. Public Polls help a candidate or in this case the president obtain some much needed information, especially with the upcoming elections in 2016.  Outgoing presidents wants to make sure that his or her party will stay in office if at all possible.

Secondly he announced that he has created the position of Chief Digital Officer and has appointed Jason Goldman to this position.  Goldman stated that he wanted to amplify White House Communication to the American people and how he was going to do this was through his office which is the Office of Digital Strategy. We learned in chapter 7 about the effectiveness of blogging, but how this form of media can sometimes have challenges of accuracy. So one of Goldman’s jobs will be to make sure that the blogs and social networks that the white house uses will have the most accurate and up to date information.  He also stated part of his goal in this position will be to expand ways so that the American people can help in the expansion of conversations and give feedback to the White House.

He goes on to comment on how much the White House and the President has used media and social networks just in the past year, to get information out to the public and most importantly to the younger American public.

First off I would like to start off by posting the link for anyone interested in reading into the details of my post. The link can be found here: http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/20/politics/us-senate-mcconnell/index.html. Now I will view this article from an agenda setting perspective. I feel as though this article is a good choice to be looked at from this theory because the article tries to grab your attention immediately, starting with the title. The title “New senate is just like the old Senate” has a negative undertone, even if the old senate was good and effective. The article starts by playing to our emotions towards the government. Most people feel a certain way toward the government and more often than not those feelings are negative. So we are primed to think negatively about the government, including the senate, from the get-go and the article is framed around that mindset starting with the title.

More specifically we are primed to think that both sides of the senate do not get along with each other. This story plays right into that priming by the way it frames the first paragraph, stating, “Governing is much tougher than it looks, even for a Master of the Senate like Mitch McConnell. Claiming the majority he had long craved in the mid-term elections, the wily GOP leader promised to turn the polarized, gridlocked Senate back into a chamber in which both sides get a say and pass meaningful legislation.” It frames the story towards the way our minds are primed and then goes in for the kill in the very next sentence stating, “McConnell’s vow was not just altruistic.” Before we can even decide for ourselves whether McConnell has succeeded or failed the opinion is already made for us, “the same old senate”. Everything about the way we are primed and the way the article is framed is bound up nicely in the first two paragraphs, telling us exactly what we should think based on what we already do.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/03/20/obama-interior-department-fracking-rules-sally-jewell/25101133/

I found this article in the USA Today and I believe this is an example of priming.  I think it shows how the current administration views fracking in the United States.  The fracking issue has been a point of contention for quite sometime with arguments from both sides of the issue.  It no has been made clear that the Obama administration has made its ruling, and fracking is in.  The E.P.A. is most likely going to continue studies and modify current regulations.  The regulations that remain in place have been the same for the past 30 years.  Obviously many things have changed within the oil drilling arena in the past 30 years, therefore it certainly would seem that the current regulations need to be updated.  When a issue such as fracking comes to the forefront of societies radar there will always be controversial, however this issue has been particularly a hot button issue because of the chemicals used for the fracking operation.  I certainly see the point of being aware of chemicals used in the operation are important to be aware of.  However now the government has made a ruling on the issue and taken a particular stand with allowing the process to continue on, which in their way is telling the public that this administration feels as if it a safe practice, therefore we as citizens of the U.S.A. should believe what they have found to be truthful information and that it is good for the country, they believe it and so should we.

The flagrant rhetoric which commonly flows from John Boehner’s style of leadership is evident with his reply to the President’s veto of the Keystone XL Pipeline. http://www.cnn.com/2015/02/24/politics/obama-keystone-veto/.  In Politics and Communication in America, Andrew Chadwick suggests in Chapter 7, key themes revolving around The Internet and Politics. Chadwick explains, in one of those themes, “In the online world it is much more likely that we will seek out like-minded people and have our views reinforced rather than challenged by alternative perspectives” (136). John Boehner’s claims that “The American People” want jobs; he asserts that the President is acting on the advice of “left-fringed extremists and anarchists” by ignoring the 200,000 new jobs that the Keystone Pipeline will create. He goes on to downplay the real issues as every day cost of doing business  with his “call to action” for President Obama to listen to the American People and “build this pipeline!”Andrew Chadwick states that the potential for exchange of information can be invaluable to gather facts about any issue; however, he also cautions the negative consequences (as seen in this clip), “this does not mean that voters will be better educated on a particular issue” (138). The sense of Community is easily manipulated and controlled and often leads to investigating only what like-minded participants promote.

Boehner and supporters of the Keystone XL Pipeline do not want the American People to understand who will benefit from this business venture; more importantly, they want to deflect from the serious issues that will forever affect our world long after the profits have been made by the select few who stand to profit. Among the many reasons for voters to become aware of what is at stake are serious environmental issues from the fossil fuel emission, threat to the safety of several water aquifers, the jobs myths, and attempt to break yet another treaty with Indigenous Peoples’ Property rights. (http://www.labor4sustainability.org/articles/5-reasons-why-the-keystone-pipeline-is-bad-for-the-economy/). In addition, it is common knowledge (or it should be), that the Koch Brothers have a monumental stake in this proposal for their economic benefit, not the American People (http://kochcash.org/justreleased/).

Lastly, some of the “left-fringed extremists and anarchists” that Boehner is referring to can be found in an extensive report by ProCon.org at (http://alternativeenergy.procon.org/view.answers.php?questionID=001628) and includes statements from experts from the Departments of Meteorology and Geosciences at Penn State, The Natural Resources Defense Council, The League of Conservation Voters,1199SEIU United Healthcare Workers, and The Indigenous Environmental Network, to name a few. It is high time for Mr. Boehner to polish up his credibility and presentation if he is expecting educated Americans to believe his rhetoric of misinformation.

Ah yes yet another scandal has reared it’s ugly head.  This time it all revolves around Hillary Clinton and if she filled out the proper departure papers when she left the state department.  The Kelly File of Fox news would like to see proof that she did.  With this the Kelly File has gone all out in an attack media mode to have this form OF-109 produced by Clinton and the state department.  As you can see in the link.http://insider.foxnews.com/2015/03/16/kelly-file-files-foia-seeking-hillary-clintons-109-form .

With this is a good example of attack media as we discussed in class.  The idea that Megyn Kelly of Fox news is requesting this form shows this clearly.  She is obviously trying to catch Hillary Clinton in some kind of wrong doing, and by using this attack media tactic she is trying to exploit Clinton for some reason.  Seeing that Hillary may run for president and Fox news perhaps being the most conservative of all news networks can make one ask some obvious questions.  Is Fox playing on some special interest inside the republican party to try and smear Clinton in some way? Why is Fox news primarily the only news media that is really pushing this agenda?  Read the link above and give me some feedback as to what you  think.