Working out the kinks

California pulled the plug on an employee training program after a public records request from a San Francisco Weekly writer revealed cash was going to teach post-production techniques to workers at a fetish-porn website.

24-hour party people

In an interestingly headlined post about President Barack Obama's $800 billion stimulus plan, Andrew Sullivan predicted the president would roll Republicans and confound media analysts who have yet to come to terms with his political style:

Politically, as the dust settles, I suspect Obama outfoxed his opponents, again. They are playing the 24 hour news cycle game. That's all they know (ditto cable news). Obama isn't. That's why he's president. Eventually, they'll figure it out.

The argument was bolstered by a recent Gallup poll that showed, despite all of the pontificating about Obama's misguided leap into bipartisanship and a resurgent GOP, Obama still had the upper hand. The results even got former Republican lawmaker Joe Scarborough's attention.

Obama is an accomplished writer and author of two books. His political cycle seems to mimic that of his writing. There's foreshadowing, the building of suspense, sometimes dry expository; but he campaigns and governs in chapters. In the end, he makes himself the central character in the story. He has shown the 24-hour news cycle to be artificial, a self-imposed schedule to mask thin reporting and weak strategy.

The loyal opposition and the media (especially cable news) needs to adjust to the new timeline if they are going to effectively counter/cover the White House.

Cable news goes right

In covering the debate over the stimulus bill, cable news shows booked twice as many Republican lawmakers as Democratic lawmakers, a survey by Think Progress found.

Before anyone blames the imbalance on a right-wing bias, first consider this is cable news, which has a bias toward ratings. Marc Ambinder of the Atlantic reasons that cable news bookers are looking to the White House, not Congress, to supply the Democratic response. While I'm sure there's some truth to that, I don't think it fully explains the disparity.

In the absence of reporting, the easiest way to appear like you're explaining something is to talk to the opposition. Not only do you get them to do the work of analyzing a complicated issue you don't really understand, but you look like you're holding someone accountable.

Of course, there's also an anti-bias bias at play - accuse the media of leaning left (and loving Obama) for long enough and they'll be sure to lean right just to prove you wrong.