大象传媒

The 大象传媒 coverage of the US elections was excellent.. keep up the good work!

Simon thanks for the informative and well balanced reporting to date. Just came across this cartoon post titled - I thought was very apt given the spectacular field year news agencies have had with the US elections this time around.

I look forward to seeing some coverage of the validation behind the hype we've all witnessed globally over the last few months.

Olga

"For many, perhaps most Americans it was plainly a profoundly moving day..."

Well actually no.

Most Americans did not vote for the new messiah. Even amongst those who voted, it was only 46/52% - basically half and half. Many Americans will be saddened that the other party won. Some Americans will actually be dismayed that a guy with liberal policies has become president on a racial vote. (see the editors blog beneath this one).

I think it would be really good if 大象传媒 employees could leave their own politics at home. Just because you personally worship Obama, and you only televise people who worship Obama, that doesn't mean all Americans like Obama.

How about a hard reality check / impartiality check on your coverage right now?

I think the 大象传媒 went a bit over-kill with its coverage of the US election. It was a big news story no doubt, but the months and months of mentioning every single tedious detail became just that - tedious.

Especially as despite having viewed countless hours of this coverage over the months, I don't actually think we ever learnt what (if any) policy differences the two candidates had. Just the constant mentioning of the colour of Obama's skin.

Sorry, but the whole thing reminded me of nothing more than the hysteria surrounding the death of Princess Diana.

"it was plainly a profoundly moving day to see an African-American installed in the White House"

Why oh why does the 大象传媒 repeatedly use this term, rather than the correct 'person of mixed race'?

'For many, perhaps most Americans it was plainly a profoundly moving day' - 'Well actually no.' #3

Well actually yes, for anyone who remembers the civil right struggles of the 1960s (John McCain certainly does*), or even knows enough history to know about the civil war that ended slavery (Lincoln - Obama's hero was a Republican BTW) the election of the first non-white President is a significant moment in US history. (As were also the appointments of Colin Powell and Condi Rice by GW Bush).

*'This is an historic election and I recognize the significance it has for African-Americans and the special pride that must be theirs tonight.' J. McCain, concession speech.

'Some Americans will actually be dismayed that a guy with liberal policies has become president on a racial vote.' #3

Obama won 44% of the white vote. US elections are won or lost on a small swing vote, the percentages are always between 45% - 55%. The economy was the decisive factor; 2008 was a Democratic year, Obama was a Democrat. With a different [white] candidate there might have been different demographics, but it'd been roughly the same national swing. It has additional resonance because of the civil rights struggles of the 1960s but that's not why Obama won.

No matter who wins - someone loses, that democracy; a healthy democracy does allow for power to swing between opposing parties, it encourages them to renew themselves and keeps them focused on how best to deliver what the electorate want. If the Republicans had won by a whisker (as in 2000) you wouldn't be complaining about the smallness of the majority. The Republicans get another chance in 2012.

And I remember that Reagan had pretty much the same effect on the public and media when he was first elected.

I listened to the speech live on radio, and then watched a recording on Sky Anytime which, as someone else says, was quite well presented. I was not particularly impressed by the radio commentary (大象传媒) which talked of a "dark but inspirational speech" when what I heard was nothing of the sort. The beauty of voice only radio is that you are not influenced by appearances only tone and inflection and I have to say it was pretty ordinary delivery and content by a man who I hope is also pretty ordinary. If that is true then the US may indeed have a revolutionary change on the cards. On the other hand, if all the hype is true, then the US populace is in for the biggest disappointment of their lives.

MLK's vision was for equality because we can then say that it really doesn't matter who is in power. I believe that was his dream and his message and the media as usual is intent on leading us (the pack) a long, long way from the truth and the reality. I expect the 大象传媒 to be above it but sadly they are not. Shame on you.

timOfBrum (#4):

despite having viewed countless hours of this coverage over the months, I don't actually think we ever learnt what (if any) policy differences the two candidates had. Just the constant mentioning of the colour of Obama's skin.

So let me get this straight, tim: despite, by your own reckoning, having "viewed countless hours of this coverage", you somehow managed to miss all the policy differences between the two candidates?!!

Incredible.

I can hand on heart say that I learned pretty much all I know about the policy differences between JM and BO by following the 大象传媒 over these last few months. Differences such as their position on:

the redistribution of wealth,
withdrawal from Iraq,
closure of Guantanamo,
dealing with Iran,
tackling climate change,
illegal immigration,
health care funding,
etc

When someone claims to have spent countless hours following the coverage and yet learned little or nothing of this and only picked up on the references to the colour of Obama's skin, well I have to wonder whether that perhaps says more about the viewer than about the 大象传媒.

The fact that the 大象传媒 also spent some time focusing on the historical significance of the first non-white President(ial candidate) - as did all the other channels and outlets - does not mean they didn't also spend ample time on the substance of the contest. The 大象传媒 were better than most other outlets in that respect.

0700am on Wednesday morning.

So that was before lunch, then?

*sigh*

7. SheffTim....

Voting -

Obama 62.5million (52.5%)
McCain 55.4m (46.2%)

All America loves him? Looks like pretty close to half and half to me.

Percentage of voters voting Obama -

43% of white voters
66% of hispanic voters
95% of black voters

Surely no one is trying to pretend that is not racial?

I've nothing at all against Obama - editors blogs are about the news coverage rather than the politics. As I said, I'd just like to hear a little more in the news about the half of American that is NOT worshipping the new messiah.

The 大象传媒 has been extremely spontaneous in accurate in-depth reporting of a remarkable event. The mere fact that an African American has won such a stunning Presidential victory is such sensational news. In addition President Obama has skillfully put together a versatile cabinet team which has hit the ground running. So real credit has to be given to this fair-minded statesman who has tried to weave a wonderful tapestry of proven talent and experience in his cabinet line-up. He has made stirring speeches exhorting Americans to live up to high ideals. This is a highly talented statesman who will lead the world with real common-sense, dignity and verve. America stands tall again.

Obama was finally proclaimed president of the United States of America on January 20, 2009. No other US president has been greeted like this by the world, and at no other time in history the victory of a US president has been perceived as a personal triumph for so many people around the world.
We, the world, have come out of eight years of pure grief with the departure of Mr. George W. Bush. Most of us didn鈥檛 have a say into the election of Mr. George W. Bush, but unfortunately we, together with those that made it happen, have paid a high price. I think no other president in US history has faced the challenges Obama faces today; it will be redundant to repeat them.
I am 45 years old and studied political science at a university in the United States of America. Me like many of my foreign classmates at that time, shared a fashionable anti-imperialist sentiment, and were critical of US foreign policies. Those were the times of Ronald Regan, and even though we didn鈥檛 agree with him, looking back, he was harmless. Somehow it was cool to be in the opposition. That young generation of then, is also the generation of Barak and Michelle Obama.
I have three children the younger two about the same age as the Obama鈥檚 children. Somehow George W. Bush in the past eight years showed us a world we don鈥檛 want to leave behind for our children; most of what we see today is war and chaos.
For generations the world has lived in a schizophrenic state between loving and hating the United States of America. Sitting in South Africa, watching the news, I saw there had been many public viewings of Obama鈥檚 inauguration all over the world, not necessarily organized by Americans, united in a common mantra 鈥測es we can鈥�. My generation of sceptics; the generation before us; and the generation ahead of us, we are all rallying today behind Obama celebrating his victory in every corner of the world.
How did that happened? We suddenly feel included in the exclusive club of US citizens. Obama will be the easy answer; I think it goes beyond Obama. The eight years of Mr. Bush, showed us the atrocities caused by power in the wrong hands; Left us with a world that is laying in intensive care. The adversity of the moment has brought us together; we are here today united hopping for peace and prosperity for all. I am still critical of US foreign policy, but for the first time in my lifetime, me and millions of non-Americans, we stand behind the president of the United States of America as if it was ours. We need peace.

"My sense is that this will resolve itself as the Obama administration begins putting out policies and we in the media start getting our teeth into reporting them."

This should have been done during the election campaign

But of course all pretence of impartiality was thrown aside as the media openly cheered for Obama

Am I alone in thinking that the 大象传媒's coverage of the Obama inauguration was not only grossly excessive but obssesive and gushing? Much of it appeared to be lifted directly from the pages of Private Eye (step forward Messrs Naughtie, Myrie et al - hon. exception: Justin Webb): eg "And [dramatic pause] still [dramatic pause] they came. On and on into the distance flowed the words of my article like a never ending river of s****" etc etc

# 11. Hi jon112uk : We had a similar debate in the Pride blog post, 06/11/08.
/blogs/theeditors/2008/11/proud.html

The term you mean is 'partisan' (adherence to one party), which is something very different from 'racist'.
90% of black voters also voted for Kerry in 2004, so their allegiance is not just to black candidates.
To make it as clear as possible, in 2004 the black vote was overwhelmingly for a white Democrat candidate; in 2008 the black vote was overwhelmingly for a non-white Democrat candidate.
Supporting both candidates in turn means they can`t be classed as racist.

This time round Black voters represented about 13% of the turnout, Hispanics around 9%, Whites around 77%. Others around 4%. (Other candidates also stood.)

Of the Hispanic vote in 2004 53% voted for Kerry, 44% for Bush. In 2008, it was 67% for Obama, 31% for McCain.
Of the White vote in 2004 - 41% voted for Kerry, 58% for Bush. In 2008, it was 44% for Obama, 55% for McCain.

Overall Obama got the second-highest percentage of the vote (as a % of the entire USA population, not just those that voted), only Reagan got a higher share in 1984.

The real questions are: why has the Republican party (the party of Lincoln, that abolished slavery) lost the support of most black voters when it used to have substantial black support only a few decades ago - up to 40%. Can it regain black [and attract Hispanic] support? Is it motivated about attempting to? Population trends suggest they should at least try. The nature of elections is that you have to win votes, not just hope they'll just arrive. I'm sure the Republican's attempts to do that will feature in the news over the next 4 years.

The Republicans have some heart-searching and some hard-headed thinking to do; but that's what elections are for - the voters say when they think a party doesn't represent their interests &/or has performed badly. But winning, losing and making comebacks is part of democracy.

The next watershed moment will be when the Republicans also field a non white candidate for either President or VP.
I would expect it in the next 2/3 presidential election campaigns, possibly even 2012.
But they'll also have to convince Black and Hispanic voters why they'll be better off voting Republican rather than Democrat.

#13

"We, the world, have come out of eight years of pure grief with the departure of Mr. George W. Bush."

If you really want to speak for "the world" then you have to go back a lot further than eight years. US foreign policy has been self centred and self interested for a very long time indeed and Bush is not the first president to have manipulated and manoeuvred media hype for its own purpose. Obama is nothing new to the world - he is a politician - and to try to state that his ethnicity somehow makes him different is a witless argument, at least until there is serious movement away from the status quo in terms of equality between rich and poor.

Our world has been stupidly locked into the image game for thousands of years and technology and media hype have compounded and clouded the real issues. To claim that the appointments of Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice made a difference to the ethnic Americans is pure fantasy. It would help if the US, once in a blue moon, actually looked at what their presidents have done and conclude, quite candidly, that there is something rotten in the way US democracy works.

I will judge Obama at the end of his first term; to do otherwise would be an act of pure conjecture. People in the real world are not as stupid as the media like to think.

Simon:
I am grateful and very glad that the 大象传媒 offered very great coverage of the Inauguration of President Obama on Tuesday, 20 January 2009...

Thanks again....

~Dennis Junior~

Over two million people showed up to be part of the Inauguration.

That's really impressive.

Thanks to SheffTim for the Kerry vote figures.

The subtext you could not see in the 大象传媒 broadcasts was the overwhelming sense of relief that George Bush and the Republicans were firmly out of power. For that you had to be in the public places and private homes around the U.S..

Everyone is hoping he does a great job...our country, our jobs our future is on the line.

I recommend you read the speech. The basic thrust is to correct the horrible mistakes made over the past 8 years.

As opposed to George Bush who has never admitted to making a mistake of any sort, Barack Obama is leveling with Americans and that in itself is reason to hope.

If you thought the 大象传媒 coverage was excessive, I can assure you this made the Super Bowl look like a pick-up game here in the U.S..

The 大象传媒 coverage was better and more realistic than NPRs.

jon112uk, you hit the nail on the head. This is one American in the 48% of voters who did not vote for Mr. Obama. He's now my president, and he has my best wishes, but the media fawning is getting to be a bit much. His election victory was exciting from the standpoint of cultural/racial healing in my country. Most educated people here do not care if their candidate is black or white. I certainly didn't. He is charming and intelligent. He is (from what we know) honest and faithful to his wife and children (how refreshing, for a Democrat!!!)... I just don't believe in trading in my liberties for higher taxes and big government!!! That's it. I'm not a Republican; I'm a plain independent...

I'm thinking that Obama will be like every other politician elected to the highest office in my country. They campaign on all sorts of party issues, then get sworn in (and debriefed on all classified issues), and voila, they turn into a moderate. Either a pinch to the right, or a pinch to the left; it's generally in the center.

I hope President Obama will be able to heal our world relationships as he's helped heal our domestic racial divide.... Oh, and WITHOUT raising my (already) overly taxed (and meager) paycheck... I hope!!!

STRATFOR is an Austin-based geopolitical think tank advising government leaders around the world, but more particularly United States Presidents (www.stratfor.com) Here's their latest to our new President, the challenges he faces, and the immediacy of his response. According to STRATFOR everything else on his agenda pales in comparison to their assessment of what he needs to address in his first 100 days. Simply click on the link right here ...



The really interesting thing is to read this side by side with the middle chapters of the book of Revelation (ie 12 - 18)

Enjoy!




Check out my websites and blog where there
are always opportunities and items of interest:
[Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator]
[Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator]
[Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator]

There is only one color that matters in the world and it is gray. It is what sits between the ears and it is only ever challenged by what is on the surface when people have a perverse and narrow minded idea of what racism is.

So a narrow minded media decide to use their perversity to encourage the world to believe that this was "historic". This is a media which. in spite of its "cool" PCness, is as racist, sexist, bigoted, and sensationalist as the unpleasant person on the street who insists in getting in your face to make their point.

The 大象传媒 have hyped upon Obama from before his selection as Democratic candidate, finding the backing of Clinton as less acceptable given that they have already had a female PM and not enjoyed the trip. That is what racism (and any other -ism) does for you - it twists you into a PC bag full of detritus. You begin to believe that somehow what is romantically portrayed on a silver screen needs to be a reality to let us breathe and become better.

Nothing is further from the truth. Whatever happened to the axiom that one person throwing a pebble into a lake barely disturbs the surface, but all of us throwing pebbles makes one hell of a splash. The world is bereft of talented leaders - why? Is it, I wonder, because politics attracts the wrong people for the wrong reasons?

I've been looking for a forum where I want to make this observation, and I'm not sure whether this is the right one. It's just that Pastor Rick Warren, in his inauguration invocation, referred to Barrack Obama as the son of an African immigrant. I quote: "We are so grateful to live in this land, a land of unequaled possibility, where the son of an African immigrant can rise to the highest level of our leadership."

I'd like to point out that Barrack Obama's father, a Kenyan, was a foreign student at University of Hawaii at Manoa where he met Ann Durham, Obama's mother, and subsequently got married to her. Mr. Obama senior went back to Kenya after the couple divorced. This hardly makes him an African immigrant. What does this say about Pastor Warren's credentials as an educated and enlightened thought leader? Does he think he's so knowledgeable that he doesn't need to brush up on his facts? Why should he automatically jump to the conclusion that all Africans in America are children of immigrants? This gaffe smacks of white racist superiority.

I'm surprised this slip up on Rick Warren's part has gone unnoticed.

6. At 9:09pm on 22 Jan 2009, SheffTim

"The next watershed moment will be when the Republicans also field a non white candidate for either President or VP."

Thanks for the figures Tim.

If people want to continue with the politics of division and special interest, I would guess the republicans are going to target the gender vote rather than the race vote. Last figures I saw said only 18% of Americans are black, but more than 50% are female.

Don't forget I'm not criticising Obama with my comments, I just don't agree with the news coverage worshipping him on the grounds that everyone thinks he's great - nearly half of Americans don't by the look of it.

(see 21 or 23 above)

#23

Eh?

I preferred Al Jazeera's coverage. They were live at the inauguration but regularly cut away to report other stories from around the world.

Simon,

While the 大象传媒 was able to provide rounded even cynical coverage of both of Bush's inaugurations your coverage of Obama's was rather sycophantic. Where were the critical voices so prevalent when it was Bush?

You could have covered stories other outlets 'missed' like Obama being the first to President to not go to the American Legion's Medal of Honor Ball since its inception.

Also, as a number of people have said above, Obama is not 'African American' he is mixed race which in some respects makes him more interesting. The blanket use of the term puts him in a group he is not actually a member of. His father being African not African American means he doesn't have the back story of ancestors who were slaves, and who suffered from segregation.

It's a shame you didn't investigate things like that rather than a dull love in.

PS While Anita Anand might be suited for 5 Live or whatever it's called her reporting from the Inauguration was just embarrassing.

#15 kfarhanassi

You are not alone!

#27

I understand what you're saying but surely his father being African and his mother being American make the term 'African American' just as appropriate as someone who traces their African lineage back god knows how many generations.

That race was even an element in this election proves just how little progress the world has made on the subject.

It should not matter to anyone, least of all the voter, what colour Mr Obama is. What should matter is his politics and the likelihood he will deliver to those who need a good president for a change.

Unfortunately for most of them Obama will not be anything exceptional because the US Government relies heavily on a status quo (like the global banking system) and tinkering with little blemishes on the surface that spoil the reflection. Obama will have already been clued up on just how difficult it will be for him to achieve what is necessary in his first one hundred days. Indeed he has already been made aware of what potential distractions may be used to mask his failures.

Too much of his task is dependent not on the USA but on what other nations do. Too many things are now in the hands of global companies who have no especial loyalty unless they see it making them money. That the USA economy is in tatters suggests they will be looking elsewhere.

And all the time Obama is reduced from his "messiah" status brick by brick the Republicans will become stronger and stronger, making a fierce backlash very possible. These are troubled times.

" I'm afraid some 大象传媒 colleagues have still not quite caught on..."


...meow.

My listening began with R4 on the school run. It was frustrating that the reporters "talked" over the opening events and Aretha Franklin (very excited to see her perform!) I managed to switch to TV for the oath and subsequent broadcast and again wasn't impressed. Particularly with the gormless on-the-ground reporting. My children did not extract much useful information from the commentary. They asked me lots of questions: Who is that guy? (Rev Lowery); Who is the band?; Who is that woman? (Feinstein) etc. I was waiting for a description of the outfits. Perhaps the Beeb can improve this with a follow-up for children putting the oath into historical context and showing clips/stills/coverage from previous inaugurations. And put it in political context more easily. Maybe they did - it's just many of us only have the time at the time.
And the coverage from The African Village was ridiculous. Sorry.

Perhaps the 大象传媒 should start its coverage by a ban on vague and unsourced comments by 'seasoned Washington observers'.

If there's one thing reporters should have learnt over the last decade or so, it's that sources who don't have the guts to go on record don't deserve to have their opinions propagated by the media.

There is no such thing as an unbiased 'observer' in Washington. Make the would-be opinion-formers take responsibility for their pontifications.
Put it on the record or not at all!