The Laughing Wolf

An Interesting Dilemma

Mr. Cavuto on Fox had an interesting segment on the other day, talking about how media coverage of corporations, corruption, and the like could hurt the economy. The central premise was that a good deal of news coverage was treating it as if no corporation, CEO, etc. could be trusted and that all were guilty of wrongdoing.

He has a very valid point. While there have been some spectacular problems, from MCI to ImClone, what is the real percentage of crooked to honest? Is corruption, fraud, and the like as rampant as some are portraying it? The segment on his show dealt with this, but I feel it does need to get some more attention and some facts.

My own cursory analysis tends to suggest that for every MCI or related that there are a few thousand honest companies, CEOs, CFOs, etc. It also suggests that the actual percentage of the economy affected is limited for dishonest, and quite substantial for the honest. For those directly affected, such as Enron and MCI employees and investors, it is catastrophic. Yet, how much effect did it truly have on the overall economy and for how long?

But, this lead to some other thoughts that bear consideration.

First, how well is the media covering the economy? Are not many of the same outlets and reporters/broadcasters who screeched gloom, doom, and quagmire in Iraq leading the charge here? Can we trust The Media to cover this in a fair, honest, and balanced manner?

Second, if the coverage is as biased as Mr. Cavuto and quick analysis seems to suggest, can it hurt the economy?

Third, who benefits if the economy does tank or stay as it is?

The latter question brought forth two very interesting answers. The first is, that the left/Democrats have a great deal to gain from economic problems. In fact, that is about the only chance they appear to have at the present for the 2004 elections. The media covering the economy are the same partisans who have pushed the left openly and clandestinely for some time. Could there be a conscious or unconscious desire on the part of The Media to see economic problems and corruption pushed out of proportion to its real import and impact?

Second, does this not place the Democrats in the unenviable position of having the same goals as Al-Qaeda and other enemies of the U.S.? Don’t forget, that one of the goals of 9-11 was to damage or destroy the U.S. economy and that doing so remains a top goal of such organizations. Our economic power is what truly terrifies them, and they would do about anything to destroy it.

Yet now the Democrats see the economy as a major political target against Bush. They push this is a variety of ways, and know that a poor economy is their ally. So, they face the dilemma of either fighting a major terrorist goal and improving our economy, or hoping the economy stays bad or gets worse so they can reap political rewards, realizing that a bad economy is a win for our enemies.

Interesting. I wonder if members of The Media or the Democratic party have thought this through yet. If so, I wonder what they will decide to do.

-30-