Tuesday, October 21, 2008

Clue Me In: Obama Charges For Election Night Coverage


I really don't know what to make of this report from the Chicago Sun-Time's Lynn Sweet, stating that Obama is planning on charging news outlets just under $1000 for the ability to cover their campaign on election night.

It's a bit of a non-starter of an issue for me...One would hope a news organization would have that kind of money for just these purposes, and really the only people affected by this is the media. The Obama camp claims that they will not be turning a profit on this...

I suppose an argument could be made that this sets a "dangerous precedent," that this could reflect a future unwillingness to cooperate with the media on future stories, but I'm not buying that. Especially from a reporter.

So, clue me in here. Is this a big deal?

7 comments:

JJisafool said...

Yeah, it is a little troubling. A bit like the postal rates that were going to favor high-circulation pubs while increasing rates for smaller-circ pubs like The Nation.

On one hand, the rates are actually reasonable enough that it becomes kittens for $10. You put on a price tag to discourage the jokers. On the other, it definitely hurts non-profit indy media.

I guess I mainly want to know if this has happened before. Is it a standard practice that is brought into stark relief in our age of fractured and multitudinous outlets?

JJisafool said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
the beige one said...

Clearly not. I couldn't come up with anything better at the time however, after considering and rejecting "Talk Amongst Yourselves," "Whaddaya" and "Hey, I'm Not Sure What I Think About This So Could You Tell Me What You Think So I Could Bounce My Thoughts Off Of That, Please?"

Would you like to suggest something, Mr. Guy?

the beige one said...

Happy now?

swine said...

Rhode Island: neither a road, nor an island...DISCUSS.

This is shite, ladies and gents. But I am inclined to believe the purpose is to discourage "the jokers" as JJ mentioned. Or the fanatics. It's complicated. Yes, what about the Indy media? But something tells me the Indy media will be/is much more resourceful than your usual dinosaurs and will somehow get their soundbites and even b-roll from "iReporter" types. Even if stuff is coming in via cellphones, we're used to seeing that quality, so it's not a huge deal. We'll see, but yes...this leaves me w/a bad taste in my mouth. Or, perhaps it's the combination martini and baked gorgonzola crostini I just ingested. Hmm.

Smoooochie said...

Frankly, as a donor to Obama's campaign, I don't want my dollars going to give the media a nice warm tent to cover the event.

Out of curiosity, I would be interested to know how much the press had to pay to cover the recent Alfred E Smith benefit.

anna said...

i am curious to know if this has happened in past election cycles. on the surface it makes me feel a little bit icky.