“Divergent strategies for Brown, Coakley”, “Senator takes aim; AG looks past him”, appears to have been written with an eye towards straight reporting – giving quotes from both contenders for the seat, as well as those who are supporting Coakley.
The article begins by noting that there are stark differences between the two candidates, which is an understatement. The interesting quips that follow:
“Brown, a state senator from Wrentham, signaled he would go after the attorney general with everything he had. She indicated she would do all she could to ignore him.”
Coakley, after a press event with her vanquished primary rivals, retired to her campaign headquarters in Charlestown, seeing no need to hit the trail on her first day as the Democratic nominee.
Reading these two line, one can surmise that Coakley, confident of victory, sees no need to work for the votes of Massachusetts – she comes off as more arrogant, smug, than self-assured. The article follows-up with a quote from Rep. Capuano, who was Coakley’s chief competitor in the primary:
“There is no way in hell we’re going to elect a Republican to Ted Kennedy’s seat,’’ US Representative Michael E. Capuano, Coakley’s chief primary rival, said at the unity event in the Kennedy Room of the Omni Parker House. “Period.’’
Perhaps Mr. Capuano has forgotten, but it is the people who elect public officials, and the U.S. Senate seat belongs to no one, and no party, rather, the people. Although Capuano made the statement, the general tone of arrogance and dismissal continues, and the majority of the article is focused on what Brown plans to do, and what he has done in the short time since the votes were tallied on Tuesday night. The focus on Coakley less in volume and continues to show her as dismissive.
Towards the end of the article, the Globe reports that two organizations have invited both candidates to debate, one of which will be televised nationally on CNN (given the high profile of the race). The Globe reports that Brown immediately agreed to both debates, while Coakley did not. The writer follows with this quote from Coakley:
“We know we’ll be debating,’’ Coakley said. “We look forward to debates with him.’’
In this instance it appears that Brown is eager to debate Coakley, immediately accepting both invitations to debate, while Coakley is again, dismissive.
What this article does, is to draw Coakley as an “indiffernt, arrogant woman”, while Brown is shown as more of a programmatic man. Although not in agreement with Coakley’s platform, as it is standard Democrat Party line, while Brown is preferred due to an Independent (verifiable) record, what is of concern is the possibility of subsequent articles appearing using adjectives such as “shrill”! This followed by a critique of Ms. Coakley’s attire, while addressing issues that affect her platform as an afterthought. Coakley has already experienced this type of press: during a debate with her Democrat Rivals in the primary, noted that she had foreign policy experience because she has a sister living in Europe (paraphrasing), which led to more than one “Palin comparison”. Massachusetts history should keep Coakley on defense – the Commonwealth has yet to send a woman to an office higher than a U.S. Congressional seat.
The Globe piece may have painted an accurate portrait of Coakley – she is after all the perceived frontrunner, given her cash on hand, and the fact that in most instances Massachusetts voters choose a Democrat over a Republican, therefore, she would feel not need to be out campaigning, nor a need to rush into any debates; as it is being reported by most press (based on Massachusetts history and cash on hand) that she is a “shoe-in” so to speak. That said, since the 2008 general election, women, beginning with Hillary Clinton, followed by Sarah Palin, have experienced the press as anti-woman; basically telling both women; yes, you have talents, but no you’re not ready to compete with the “boys”. It would be fair to give the public an accurate portrait, based solely on issues, one hopes that is what will occur in the weeks leading up to the election on January 19th.
Read the full Globe article here
No comments:
Post a Comment