Media Analysis: Obama\'s Jobs Bill

Media Analysis: Obama's Jobs Bill

Unemployment is a huge problem in the United States. The recent economic recession has left a lot of people in the nation without work for long periods of time. Unemployment in a nation usually leads to an increase in crime, mental health issues, and other social ills for the population.

Politicians have taken many steps recently to solve the problem of unemployment. President Obama, a Democrat, has proposed a "jobs bill" in Congress to stimulate the economy. However, members of the opposition party, the Republicans have disputed many parts of the bill, saying it is wasteful and irresponsible.

This type of political warfare is nothing new for the nation. Republicans have tried to block the efforts of Democrats in dealing with unemployment before. For example, Republicans tried to block the Democrats when they were trying to extend the unemployment benefits term. The Democrats ended up having to pass a Republican tax proposal in return for the Republicans' support to pass the unemployment bill.

You expect most people, especially unemployed people, to get angry at a politician if he is trying to block the government from fixing a social problem that affects them. However, this is not the case here with the unemployment problem. Unemployed people are actually more angry at the politician trying to help them, President Obama, than the politicians that are trying block that help, the Republicans. This situation is very unusual, and the reason it comes about has to do with media claims offered by Republicans and Democrats.

My paper will look at how politicians attempt to justify themselves when they block or delay the government from fixing social problems.

The media plays a huge role in influencing public opinion about political issues. Politicians are expected to answer questions from reporters any time they are asked, unlike most public figures. Reporters are expected to ask the politicians questions about issues that are important to their audience. In this sense, the media is like a mouthpiece for the public in their dialogue with the politicians.

Politicians and members of the media cannot live without each other. Because of this, they often develop really close relationships. The President has an official spokesperson as part of his cabinet and the White House even has a special press corps made up of select members of the media.

The media influences public opinion in a number of ways. It does this by informing the public about important events. It sets the terms of the debate by selecting key topics and issues for public debate. Last, it provides background information and opinions which members of the public can evaluate for themselves.

Traditional media outlets such as the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal have given a lot of coverage to the jobs bill battle. They are very influential newspapers when it comes to economic issues such as unemployment. The Washington Post and the Huffington Post have also covered the jobs bill a lot because they are influential publications when it comes to politics and government.

Blogs have also given a lot of coverage to the jobs bill. Politically-themed blogs are very popular on the internet because they offer a convenient way for less established groups to express their opinions to the mass public. Conservative blogs, usually supporting the Republicans, have given a lot of attention to the jobs bill.

Thesis: Mainstream periodicals influence public perception by deciding which events are important enough to cover and which facts to include when relating the news. Special interest publications influence public opinion by analyzing news events for its audience with a particular agenda in mind.

Traditional News Articles

Both the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times have given heavy coverage to Obama's job bill. The Wall Street Journal is considered a mainstream media periodical, even though it has a politically conservative bias on economics. The Wall Street Journal actually started out as a business periodical delivering only business-related news. However, it has expanded to regular news coverage like the New York Times. The Wall Street Journal usually represents the Mainstream Conservative position on economic issues whereas the New York Times represents the Mainstream Liberal position on economic issues.

In the Wall Street Journal article, "The Spend Now, Tax Later Jobs Bill," author Alan Reynolds takes a critical look at Obama's job bill. In this article, Reynolds, claims that Obama's Plan for Economic Growth and Deficit Reduction does not do what he Obama says it will do, which is "…lower tax rates…" and "…cut wasteful loopholes and tax breaks…" Instead, Reynolds claims that it actually "…raises rather than lowers tax rates…" and "… shrinks tax deductions to pay for more spending…"

Reynolds is acting as a claimsmaker here.

To support his claims, Reynolds uses statistics and complex financial calculations to show that the plan will actually lead to an increase in the permanent tax rate. Reynolds claims that Obama is "intermingling the phasing-out of deductions and exemptions with allowing the Bush tax rates to expire, thus increasing the top two tax rates to 36% and 39.6% from 33% and 35%."

Reynolds probably uses financial calculations because the Wall Street Journal has a highly sophisticated audience that expects every claim to be backed up by solid math.

In the New York Times article, "A Plan on Jobs Deserves a Hearing," author Christine D. Romer takes a critical look at some common arguments against Obama's proposal. Thus, Romer is looking at the claims made by claimsmakers from the Conservative side. However, Romer does not look at narrow, factual claims such as Reynold's claim that the jobs bill will increase taxes. Instead, Romer chooses to look at the predictions and value judgments made by the Conservative side, which allow for much more speculation that factual claims.

In evaluating the arguments against the jobs bill, Romer focuses on poking holes in the argument's reasoning. Romer considers the argument "that individual tax cuts won't work," as they will not "actually boost consumer spending because rising gas prices and low consumer confidence are depressing consumer spending."

In response, Romer points out that although consumer spending level may not be increased by the individual tax cuts, they would certainly be worse off without the individual tax cuts.

Special Interest Articles - Blogs

Speak Now America is a conservative political blog that covers many economic issues. In a recent blog post, "Obama Says Jobs Bill Will Cost $235,263 Per Job," the blog claims that the "Job Bill is Really A Bailout for Democrat States."

For support, the blog references articles from other periodicals such as a Wall Street Journal article that pointed out that certain Democrat-controlled state would stand to benefit heavily from the jobs bill. The blog expands this observation into the conclusion that the "Jobs Bill is Really a Bailout for Democrat States."

The blog also claims that the "jobs bill by Obama is another pork payoff for unions. We can't afford a $447 billion slush fund for the unions. Giving money to unions and taxing the job creators is Obama's true policy."

Calling the bill a "slush fund" or a "pork payoff" for unions is not meant to be a factual claim. Rather, the claimsmaker is recharacterizing the situation by giving it the problem a name, which will give the reader another way of understanding the bill.

The political blog, Always on Watch, is Libertarian political blog that is focused on monitoring the growing power of the Federal Government. In the blog post, "The Destructive Power of Obama's Jobs Bill," the blog claims that "Section 376 of Obama's tax and spend "jobs" bill ends state sovereignty, turns our Republic into a dictatorship and destroys the foundation upon which our country was built."

To drive the point home, the blog includes a videographic history lesson called "The American Form of Government," a short guide to the values of the U.S. Constitution.

Here, the claimsmaker is relying on Cultural Values to build support for his claim with the readers. The blog is essentially saying that the jobs bill will bring us further away from the "American Form of Government" by increasing Federal Government power and threatening state sovereignty.

Analysis

Overall, mainstream periodicals and special interest blogs are both influential in shaping public opinion in regards to political issues. Both types of media tell people about current events and what is important about those events. Both types of media command a loyal audience who look to these sources for insight into what these events mean for their own interests.

Although both types of media are responsible for conveying information about current events, mainstream periodicals have a bigger burden than blogs in doing this. Mainstream periodicals often have responsibility for uncovering news as well as explaining it. Blogs, on the other hand, are not expected to uncover news, only to explain it to the audience. Thus, blogs rely on mainstream periodicals for material but have more freedom to focus on particular elements of the situation.

Generally, the quality of writing and evidence is higher in mainstream periodicals than in political blogs. Part of this is due to the fact that mainstream periodicals are written by full-time professional journalists, whereas blogs are usually not. It is also because of the higher expectations placed on mainstream periodicals. Reputation and credibility are huge assets to a mainstream periodical. Mainstream periodicals are scrutinized by rival periodicals and by their own readership through the "Letters to the Editor" section. Blogs face much less scrutiny because people do not rely on blogs for basic factual information.