Cluck cluck cluck. Get used to that sound. It’s chickens coming home to roost. Since June 3rd there’s been a buzz about the unfairness of the media in giving Barack Obama more coverage than John McCain. I have two words and a comma for this imbalance: Well, duh.
Obama does get much more press than McCain. But let those who cry “unfair!” ponder this. Who would sell more magazines if s/he was on the cover, Angelina Jolie or Madeleine Albright? Brad Pitt or Harry Reid? If you turn on the TV and there's a nerdy guy in glasses debating, “…are we talking about rezoning or are we talking about redistricting…” are you going to stare transfixed at him or channel surf until you happen upon Bret Favre chasing down a guy with a ball? Would you rather listen to a brilliant speech by a dazzling, inspiring motivator or sit through a jeremiad by an older gentleman who can string a sentence together but always manages to look just a little tired? Right or wrong, Obama is more interesting and, yes, infinitely hotter than John McCain.
As Americans we go for the glitz. We like pizzazz. Ring-a-ding-ding trumps blah. Add the fact that it’s all about marketing. What sells? Young over old, TV over movies, lowest common denominator over esoteric. If this country were truly ready to give older, glamour-challenged frumps the same kind of press that young rock stars get, it would have shown up years ago in the dollar signs driving our media. So to whom do we carp when Obama's gorgeous mug gets a full page picture on page one and McCain gets a paragraph in the business section? The mirror.