{"id":197847,"date":"2008-01-07T17:45:00","date_gmt":"2008-01-07T22:45:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/2008\/01\/07\/christopher-hayes-proposals-for-good-campaign-coverage\/"},"modified":"2008-01-07T17:45:00","modified_gmt":"2008-01-07T22:45:00","slug":"christopher-hayes-proposals-for-good-campaign-coverage","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.panix.com\/~msaroff\/40years\/2008\/01\/07\/christopher-hayes-proposals-for-good-campaign-coverage\/","title":{"rendered":"Christopher Hayes’ Proposals for Good Campaign Coverage"},"content":{"rendered":"

His proposals<\/a> are pretty common sense, but they would improve coverage a lot:<\/p>\n

Then there\u2019s the additional problem that the longer a reporter spends with a campaign, the more likely they\u2019ll develop either a kind of contempt for the candidate and the campaign or a strange version of stockholm syndrome. Clearly this was the case during 2000 and 2004 when the dislike for both Gore and Kerry was palpable. This might be natural and human, but it breeds awful journalism.<\/p>\n

Finally, we have the perenial complaint that the coverage focuses on the horse-race and the theater of the campaign and not on the issues. But I don\u2019t really think that\u2019s the fault of reporters. First, they have to file constantly on short deadlines. So even if Obama releases a tax plan one day, and you write a piece about that, that\u2019s still only a one-day story. What do you write about the next day? Why, Obama sniping with Hillary or somesuch. Second of all, consider the imbalance in expertise between a campaign and those who cover it. When Obama releases a tax plan, it\u2019s a product of a team of policy experts, who know the terrain inside and out. But the reporter who has to file the deadline piece about it doesn\u2019t have any expertise on tax policy. So how could their coverage be anything but shallow?<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

His proposals:<\/p>\n