President Bush Doesn't Know How Interest Rates Are Set
I really feel sorry for Americans sometimes because they have to put up with an incompetent president and a sorry bunch of reporters. Two events this week blew my mind.
One, President Bush does not know how interest rates are set. He told a group of reporters that "an independent group" is responsible for determining interest rates.
He is evidently not acquainted with Alan Greenspan or Ben Bernanke, the former and new head of the Federal Reserve Bank. Or the years of news: Greenspan is lowering/raising interest rates.
And he got cranky bc someone interrupted him as he was answering. So he said it twice.
Doesn't surprise me, given that he has said many times that he doesn't read newspapers. He gets all the news he needs from his staff, he says proudly. That fact alone explains why he seems to be living in an alternative reality regarding many issues, including the war in Iraq. Increasingly it reminds me of stories from journalists during the Vietnam War, who took to calling the 5 o'clock briefing the 5 o'clock follies. A seasoned Washington reporter warned me that reporting in DC was like having a bad case of cognitive dissonance: they'll tell you the sky is green and the grass is blue, she said.
Okay, news value is a hard thing to pin down for me sometimes, such as in this case. I think it is certainly news that the head of the most powerful country in the world (ugh!) does not know how interest rates work. But if it weren't for Marketplace, a radio show on KQED radio, I wouldn't have known. Didn't see it, read it or hear it from any other news outlet. Don't you think that's news, though? Honestly.
The other issue is the response that Bush got by taking a question from Helen Thomas, the 85-year-old salty reporter who covered Washington politics and the White House for ages. I've heard she still commandeers UPI's seat at WH press briefings. (Thomas spent years at UPI until the Moonies bought it. She quit and they began running the news service into the ground. Rev. Moon owns The Washington Times also.)
The news was not that he took her question (that's called doing your job) or was unscripted. The news should have been that he answered her question about why war by saying that "they attacked us, Helen." She had to remind him that had to do with Afghanistan. Not Iraq. What should have been newsworthy was the credibility, accuracy and substance – or lack of those qualities – of his answers. The bar has been set really low with that guy.
I promise to do better, always. Whether it is my lowly reporting job at The Argus or, one day, with higher profile positions.
One, President Bush does not know how interest rates are set. He told a group of reporters that "an independent group" is responsible for determining interest rates.
He is evidently not acquainted with Alan Greenspan or Ben Bernanke, the former and new head of the Federal Reserve Bank. Or the years of news: Greenspan is lowering/raising interest rates.
And he got cranky bc someone interrupted him as he was answering. So he said it twice.
Doesn't surprise me, given that he has said many times that he doesn't read newspapers. He gets all the news he needs from his staff, he says proudly. That fact alone explains why he seems to be living in an alternative reality regarding many issues, including the war in Iraq. Increasingly it reminds me of stories from journalists during the Vietnam War, who took to calling the 5 o'clock briefing the 5 o'clock follies. A seasoned Washington reporter warned me that reporting in DC was like having a bad case of cognitive dissonance: they'll tell you the sky is green and the grass is blue, she said.
Okay, news value is a hard thing to pin down for me sometimes, such as in this case. I think it is certainly news that the head of the most powerful country in the world (ugh!) does not know how interest rates work. But if it weren't for Marketplace, a radio show on KQED radio, I wouldn't have known. Didn't see it, read it or hear it from any other news outlet. Don't you think that's news, though? Honestly.
The other issue is the response that Bush got by taking a question from Helen Thomas, the 85-year-old salty reporter who covered Washington politics and the White House for ages. I've heard she still commandeers UPI's seat at WH press briefings. (Thomas spent years at UPI until the Moonies bought it. She quit and they began running the news service into the ground. Rev. Moon owns The Washington Times also.)
The news was not that he took her question (that's called doing your job) or was unscripted. The news should have been that he answered her question about why war by saying that "they attacked us, Helen." She had to remind him that had to do with Afghanistan. Not Iraq. What should have been newsworthy was the credibility, accuracy and substance – or lack of those qualities – of his answers. The bar has been set really low with that guy.
I promise to do better, always. Whether it is my lowly reporting job at The Argus or, one day, with higher profile positions.
posted by A.W. Woodall at 5:14 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home