Anyone who is following this campaign closely knows that the McCain-Palin campaign is engaged in the deliberate promulgation of lies - that is, knowing falsehoods. The author, to her credit, does offer more examples of McCain's dissembling than Obama's. But to suggest that there is even a remote similarity between the two sides amounts to a journalistic elevation of phony balance over accuracy and truth.

A very important topic, this piece doesn't expound enough about the media's role in spreading disinformation.

While presenting a rather balanced viewpoint and stating clearly the conclusion that "Political innocents may wonder why a candidate like McCain, whose campaign is premised on what he calls 'straight talk' -- and to a lesser extent Obama -- have veered from the flat truth. The answer is simple: because it works", this article is too terse, and indeed is not examining at all the role of mainstream media in propagating those lies.

It’s time that the media stop defending this man and wake up and see the warning signs before it’s too late. Do we want a president who let’s others unknown to us including the lobbyists who work for him make decisions for him and for us as a nation? Who are we electing to be our president; John McCain or Carl Rove?

This opinion piece has modest journalistic merit. It ignores most of the inaccurate accusations spread by the campaigns, particularly Obama's. It does not even mention the US Weekly cover article, run by a close friend and major donor of Obama's, not the hundreds of anti-Palin pieces in the Party media since her selection. It does not mention the hit piece done by the NY Times on McCain this spring. So the context is entirely missing. Even the "lipstick on a pig" joke of Obama was ... More »