Conventions too tidy, scripted

At a panel discussion at Harvard over the weekend, PBS news anchor Jim Lehrer launched into a pointed criticism of the paltry coverage the nation's major television networks plan to give the Democratic and Republican political conventions this summer. As news anchors from CBS, NBC and ABC listened and agreed, he noted how the nation is at war and how one of the two parties would be leading things for the next four years. By not covering these meetings in prime time, the networks are sending a "huge" message to the people.

As the New York Times reported the event, the lecture hall "echoed with applause." And yet, most Americans don't seem to be demanding the networks do more.

Without a doubt, coverage of political conventions has changed dramatically over the last 12 years or so. But then, the conventions themselves have changed, too.

For both parties, this year's meetings will be little more than scripted infomercials. The Times said party officials at the Democratic Convention, which began yesterday, had tried to control who the networks interview and even which questions were asked of Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., the nominee. The Republicans have been carefully orchestrating their own convention for later this summer.

A lot of folks can remember what it used to be like. Political conventions were ideological tugs of war where delegates fought over issues of the day and where the nominee and his running mate weren't chosen until the very end. In 1964, Democrats walked a tightrope on the issue of civil rights, trying to keep the entire Southern delegation from walking out while still nominating the progressive Sen. Hubert Humphrey to be the candidate for vice president. In 1968, the party endured similar chaos, punctuated by loud anti-war protests outside.

It was messy, but it was good for democracy. Americans watching at home (and there was little else to watch at the time), knew that the political parties had to hammer out a consensus from several competing ideas. Today, the machinery is hidden. All the people get to see is the shiny, finished product. Folks who may not agree 100 percent with the final platform are made to feel alienated.

No wonder the major networks no longer want to spend much time on this. Besides, viewers today have hundreds of other programs from which to choose.

To a large measure, times have changed because the parties have become more democratic. Conventions have been replaced by primary elections as the vehicle for choosing a candidate. Ideally, this should make people more engaged in the process. Instead, an archaic system of primaries has a couple of smaller states whittling the field early, leaving the rest with little to chew on. Voters in several states feel alienated. The nominees are chosen months in advance of the conventions.

The answer to all of this lies in a nationwide primary vote. That would get people re-engaged in the party process.

We're not suggesting people ignore what coverage there is of the convention under way. It offers a good opportunity to evaluate the Democratic Party and its nominee. But the parties themselves have got to realize the nation would benefit by a system that gets more Americans in on the excitement of politics.

Comments