while the US presidential elections are still months away, that hasn't stopped the media coverage from shooting into overdrive before the Iowa primary was even held. So far most of the articles have read as so: OBAMA WINS! OBAMA MANIA SWEEPS THE NATION! OBAMA TO BE NEXT US PRESIDENT! HILLARY WINS! HILLARY NOW FAVORITE! OH, WAIT, AND THAT OLD GUY, HE WON TOO!
And that's just in the foreign French and UK media I read. While I was sort of expecting it from the NY Times (whose coverage, it has to be noted, has been pretty stellar so far), it does tend to grate to read almost as much about it in Le Monde or The Guardian, often done in a very personal fashion, as though this directly concerns the audience. Last time I checked, French and British citizens don't vote for the US president. And while it's often a fascinating subject, especially in a country where the political system is so different (get ready for about 14 billion articles on that wild and wacky electoral college system come October, not to mention the voting machines) from ours, there are still plenty of other things going on in the world. Then again, if that means less articles and reports about Sarkozy and his women (ministers of otherwise), maybe it's for the best.
I get it, the United States are still a major superpower, and the last 8 years not having been the best (to say the least) for its stature, there is a sky-high attention to the results from the vote. But it still doesn't change the fact that whatever discourse and analysis is done throughout the world media, 99.9% of their audience will not get a say on Election Day. There's nothing wrong with being interested in this whole circus (I sure am doing my part in my daily readings), but a little added distance might not be so bad.
1 comment:
Poor old Le Monde! As if they weren't in enough trouble, you don't want them to write about the U.S. elections and you don't want them to write about Sarkozy's private life - they'll have nothing left!!
Post a Comment