Weekly Assignment #3

1."Mincing Up Michelle" by Maureen Dowd

First off, I initially chose this article because I have an aunt that reminds me of Michelle Obama. Their stories are very similar and they carry themselves in the same manner. They both went to Princeton and wear suits to work. As a result, I was anxious to see what the writer had to say about how she would be covered by the media, and what they thought her role would be in this upcoming election.

This article mainly discussed what challenges Michelle Obama has had to face with her image being placed in the spotlight. Dowd wrote about the portrayal of Mrs. Obama by the opposition. They talked about how Hillary Clinton could've garnered more votes by discussing that she had a "lack of strong American roots", which was an underlying of racial subtext. This article in particular stressed how important her role in the campaign is going to be simply just by having a major voice on the behalf of Barack Obama, her husband. The article stressed that her role hinges on her ability to be relatable to all female voters.

In my opinion, this article addresses an issue that will help us find out how cultured our country really is. How can we say that someone who grew up in America lacks strong American roots? Maybe I read into that statement wrong, but I feel like what the writers from the Times, Jim Ruenberg and Peter Baker, were trying to say was that, because she was black, she lacked the genuine "white American roots." This article goes into depth concerning how Michelle appears much different than Barack, and how she seems so much on the other side of the spectrum than what American First Ladies of the past have been. I think she will deal with it all in stride and possibly erase some of the stereotypes that we have of black women.

2. "Angry Clinton Women | McCain?" by Frank Rich

I chose this article because it was directly related to how women voters will effect the upcoming election. It used the percentage margin between Obama and McCain among women to explain just how unified the Democratic Party is.

Rich used a large amount of numbers and situational effects from past elections to imply that the Democratic Party is being falsely portrayed as divided, while the Republican party is all but in shambles. It also stresses just how fake the McCain Campaign appears to be in its relation with female voters. The main point is that, Hillary Clinton dropping out of the race is not hurting Obama's Campaign, it is making it stronger.

This article did a lot for my statistical reasoning as to why Clinton's voters will vote for Obama in the election. Initially, I had strong doubt that Hillary supporters would hurt Obama simply because both Democratic Campaigns were in strong disagreement with McCain's. It seems logical that Democrats, especially in a time like this, would unite around its candidate. Not divide themselves simply in bitterness. Rich painted a patronizing picture of McCain in his interaction with entertaining the female vote. He seems to be making it hard for loyalists to stay loyal based solely on political affiliation. McCain was hung out to dry in this column.

In Comparison and Contrast

I believe that both articles were saying the same thing. They both say that the female vote will decide the dynamic of how close of a race it will be. The first article, written by Dowd, focuses primarily on how the McCain Campaign will portray the First Lady of the Democratic Party, while the second article dives into the mark that Hillary has made in the election post resignation. They are similar in their portrayal of McCain being insensitive and careless in his future political strategy in concern to women, but they differ in stating whether or not the strategies will work. In concern to race, they both have statistics that point to white women being the "object of both campaigns affection." In the first article, it implies that McCain will look to point out how much Michelle Obama will not be able to relate to white female voters, while in the second article it discusses how the white female voter has already joined Obama's Campaign. In essence, both articles display a current boost for Obama which has potential to win him the race before it has begun. One article using Michelle Obama as that secret weapon, and the other using Hillary Clinton.

Clearly race and gender is the only major topic of both of these columns. Both of the articles are defined by their titles alone. Just by seeing the word "mincing" or "angry" both in relation to women tells the readers that the articles are solely about gender.

With as much focus as their is being placed on race in the upcoming election, I was eager to learn more about the role gender will and has already played in the media. When I look at the race, I see Obama, a black man, trying a bit of a new-school approach in politics. He looks to have that new, shiny plastic wrap around his image when it comes to what appeals to me. Our society is driven, in most cases, by newness. His campaign is centered around things being new, and in doing that, when the media does that same old sex, lies, videotape smear on him, it only makes his words resonate stronger. The media, in most outlets, have caught on to that and taken a different approach on the portrayal of the race. For the first time in a while, the media are paying attention to so much detail simply because there are so many different angles by which you can cover a Hillary Clinton and a Barack Obama, which is why we still have yet to hear as much about McCain. He seems to be a bit more protected by the media than any other candidate at this point. Now that the country is on a hangover from the nail-biting finish of this "Democratic Political Championship" so to speak, the world has seen much more from this conference than they have the juggernaut on the other side, who went through the 2008 Presidential Playoffs unscathed. I am anxious to see how these two teams match up in the media as the game progresses. Obama appears to have a very strong offense, while McCain looks to have an even better defense. And with what the last Champion has left, McCain is going to need it.

Race has already had an effect on the election. Before I could even know where to find him, I was being hurried to go look at this new black candidate that was going to take the White House "for real this time." My first thought was, "great, another Al Sharpton." It turns out that while race initially got me interested, it isn't what has kept me interested. I personally could care less about "helping a brother out" when it comes to voting. I tend to let my decisions speak for themselves, and leave it to the naysayers to sort out. I, as a black male, considered voting for Hillary, and know many black men that did. I believe that the biggest effect race and gender have had is evident in the amount of increase voting has gained over the primaries alone. To say that race and gender have had an effect would be a complete understatement, and everyone is aware of that thus far.

Privilege was apparent in some of the examples used in the first story, including the main statement by which my perspective was based. To say that white roots equal American roots is to subtly say that American equals white. That serves as a prime example of white privilege. In the other article, there wasn't much of anything pertaining to privilege in any race. As I carefully re-read this article, I was hard pressed to find a statistic that wasn't specific enough in what it meant to what the writer was really trying to say. He was careful in his information gathering.

In closing, I would like to say that I am pleased with the direction things appear to be moving in. I have invested a large amount of my personal emotions into this race. I have hope that even if Obama does not win, that he has woken up a voice that hasn't been collectively heard in quite sometime. I almost feel as if this race will be another defining moment in American History, and I am quite proud to be part of it. Now, with all that out of the way, I still feel as if there are many issues that have yet to be addressed by both of the major candidates. Reading all of these articles was very helpful in my outlook in the way media effect the way we think. As journalists, writers have a responsibility to seek the truth, and in every single article, I appeared to witness a one-sided general statement. Is this because the media is biased? It ultimately depends on who you are getting your news from. We as voters need to choose our news providers carefully, and really make an effort to research and learn as much as we can. America has never been as close to a true democracy than we are now, and for once race and gender is not only something that cannot be denied, but something that must be payed close attention to.