ChrisWeigant.com

Please support ChrisWeigant.com this
holiday season!

The Media And The Tea Partiers

[ Posted Thursday, January 6th, 2011 – 16:36 UTC ]

In taking in the news of the 112th Congress' first new steps (especially those taken by the Republican House of Representatives), I had to wonder -- how will the Tea Party and the Tea Partiers be treated by the mainstream media, going forward? Will they still have a voice in the media's political coverage of the next two years, and what will that voice say? To put the point I'm trying to make more succinctly: will the Tea Partiers become "old news" to the media?

Of course, when pondering this question, the first problem in answering it is the problem the Tea Party has had all along -- they don't exactly speak with a single voice. I've long maintained that this is both the Tea Partiers' biggest strength and their biggest weakness. By design, the Tea Party was supposed to be a bottom-up organization, and not top-down. This was further complicated by some folks who tried to co-opt the movement with their own "fake grassroots" top-down organizations. There is no monolithic "Tea Party" in other words, instead there are a lot of "Tea Parties."

But the media chose a few "Tea Party leaders" on their own, and used these voices to purport to show what the Tea Party stood for as a group. But things have now changed. Now the Tea Party has elected some folks to Congress, the media may look to them to be the quasi-official voices of what the Tea Partiers want and believe, leaving behind their previously-anointed Tea Party spokespeople. But the newly-elected Tea Party Republicans (to differentiate them from rank-and-file Tea Partiers, for convenience's sake) are already becoming creatures of Washington (hiring lobbyists for their staffs, and jumping in to the moneygrubbing for campaign funds with both feet), so at some point they may actually be rejected by the Tea Partiers at large. But if the media (by that point) is ignoring the Tea Party rank-and-file, will this ever become "newsworthy" in their eyes? Who speaks for the Tea Party (apologies to the Lorax for the misquote) may become a pivotal question in terms of how the Tea Party folks are seen by the rest of the country. If their grassroots message becomes co-opted by the very people they sent to Washington, nobody's going to notice much if the media doesn't realize it and report on it.

Of course, "governing" is to "campaigning" as "being married" is to "courting." It's more complicated and a lot more down-to-earth, in other words. The Tea Party Republicans in Congress are virtually guaranteed to begin annoying the Tea Party voters, almost immediately. The sky-high rhetoric of a campaign promise is simply not the same thing as realizing you are one of 435 people in only one chamber of the legislature -- and to get anything truly done (as opposed to meaningless political gestures), the process gets very messy very quickly, and usually winds up in some form of compromise or another.

But the Tea Party voters don't strike me as a very compromising bunch of people. The original libertarians in the Tea Party was almost as distrustful of the Republican Party as they were of the Democrats, remember. Which means they'll be watching closely for unorthodoxy from their newly-elected Tea Party Republicans (at least, that's my guess). And for wishy-washiness as well. Case in point is the proud Republican pledge to "cut $100 billion from the budget" in their first year. Already this number is being tossed out the window by Republicans in the House. You see, they really meant "$50 billion" when they said "$100 billion." Or maybe it's just "$30 or 40 billion," who knows? The Tea Partiers are already noticing this goal post movement, but the question that remains is will they be heard by the media, or will the media simply interview a few Tea Party Republicans in the House who brush the figures under the rhetorical rug?

It's simply too early to tell. The 112th Congress is but a day or so old, so it remains to be seen how the whole thing is going to play out. The media could get bored with the whole topic and move on. The media could also latch onto the "underdog" aspect of the story (the media simply loves a good "underdog" story), and put it in David-and-Goliath terms. We could get former Tea Party spokespeople ripping into Tea Party Republicans on cable television, if the media truly decides to fan these flames. Which would put the Republican congressional leadership in an even tighter spot than they're going to occupy for the next few years, as they try both to appease the Tea Partiers and to actually get some things done. House Speaker John Boehner is likely to have an easier time of this than Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, because the House can pass all sorts of nonsense while being fully aware that the Senate is not going to act upon any of it -- which allows Boehner to throw red meat to his base without running the danger of any of it actually becoming law.

My guess is that the story will play out at least for the first half of 2011 in the media -- with a peak in coverage right around April's "tax day," the traditional Tea Party rally day. This will be right around the time of big budget battles in Congress, which (this time around) are largely going to be fought within the Republican Party (instead of as in the past two years, a struggle between the Blue Dog Democrats and the Progressives). The media will focus on this fight for a while, because it will be the best bout in town to attend. But at some time in the late spring or summer, the overwhelming political media focus is going to shift to the Republican presidential nomination race -- which will so consume the media that everything else becomes no bigger than a footnote. The media loves a good horserace story more than just about any other story, at least in the political realm. The Tea Party factionalism in the Republican Party story will then be absorbed into the nominating race, which will then boil down to one obsessive question: Is Sarah Palin going to run?

 

-- Chris Weigant

Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant

 

16 Comments on “The Media And The Tea Partiers”

  1. [1] 
    Hawk Owl wrote:

    Sorry, I've been away for a while, but this column's a nice "re-entry" trip. Your distinction between the [actual grass-roots] "Tea-Partyers" and the [elected] "Tea-Party Republicans" struck me immediately as a very pragmatic distinction to be kept in mind as this circus parades around under the big tent, - - as does your prognostication about the Media and their likely attention-span trajectory.
    On top of which, I thought your cagey lead-in (or should it be "lead-up"?) to the last quote was humorous with an activated germ of truth which will linger as we move along your timetable. Mark Twain would have nodded, knowingly, with a wry, sly grin.

  2. [2] 
    Osborne Ink wrote:

    Chris, I'm glad to see you note the difference between the libertarian tea party and the movement conservative-tea party. They are actually not comfortable together. I noted this tension at the Nashville Convention; here is confirmation from an attendee. So another question might be whether Ron Paul is running, who he might endorse, and whether the tea party will divide over this. It's already a fractious, fissiparous movement with at least six major organizations calling themselves "tea party."

  3. [3] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    the mainstream media have the collective attention span of a three-year old, to match the television viewing audience. they go, "ooh, shiny," and if it doesn't involve sex, violence, theft, scandal winners, losers, cute kids and animals, the folks at news organizations just aren't capable of paying attention to it.

  4. [4] 
    Michale wrote:

    Excellent commentary, CW.. I can always count on you to give the TP a fair shake..

    Would that the Hysterical Left would be so rational..

    It's funny to see the Left fall all over themselves expressing their hatred/scorn/ridicule of the Tea Party movement.

    The dynamic at work here is much the same as when Sarah Palin was elevated to national politics.

    At that time, the Left viewed a woman's ascension to the executive branch as their own private domain. And then this usurper comes along and trumps that.

    Now, we have a real grass-roots movement (another idea that the Left has viewed as it's own private Idaho) that's actually appealing to the average American..

    The fact that both have been wildly successful where the Left has utterly failed simply adds insult to injury..

    Michale.....

  5. [5] 
    Quaker in a Basement wrote:

    In English: "Watch while I defeat this colossus of straw!"

  6. [6] 
    Michale wrote:

    In English: "Watch while I defeat this colossus of straw!"

    TRANSLATION: "I have no logical or rational argument against the message so I'll attempt to ridicule the messenger"

    Yer acknowledgment of my intellectual superiority is appreciated albeit irrelevant. :D

    Michale.....

  7. [7] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    michale,

    i don't know that there's so much hatred or scorn from the left, so much as amusement. what ridicule exists is probably due to the majority of the tea party folks being every bit as ridiculous as the lefty protests they seem to be emulating. it should be noted that most lefties see the lefty protests of this sort as passe at best, embarrassing at worst. so, seeing an equally silly protest from the other side must tickle them in all sorts of ways. initially, fox actually implored people to "teabag obama," seemingly unaware of the alternate meaning that implied. maddow couldn't even get through her report without cracking up.

  8. [8] 
    Quaker in a Basement wrote:

    TRANSLATION: "I have no logical or rational argument against the message so I'll attempt to ridicule the messenger"

    You missed altogether. The reference to a "colossus of straw" was indeed an evaluation of your so-called "message." Said message calls into existence a fearsome but entirely imaginary foe which you pretend to wallop the daylights out of. Meanwhile, you're once again presuming to speak for "the average American."

    Are you really inviting me to take it all apart bit by bit?

  9. [9] 
    Quaker in a Basement wrote:

    Now if I wrote, "And you look like a monkey," that would be ridiculing the messenger.

  10. [10] 
    Michale wrote:

    i don't know that there's so much hatred or scorn from the left, so much as amusement.

    Tea Baggers???

    'nuff said.. :D

    it should be noted that most lefties see the lefty protests of this sort as passe at best,

    Really?? For example???

    QIAB,

    Meanwhile, you're once again presuming to speak for "the average American."

    I speak for the average Independent and/or NPA...

    That's good enough for me..

    Are you really inviting me to take it all apart bit by bit?

    That's why I am here....

    Have a ball... :D

    Now if I wrote, "And you look like a monkey," that would be ridiculing the messenger.

    Only if you added, "... and ya smell like one too"

    hehehehehehehehehehe

    Oh com'on! THAT was funny!! :D

    "It was a little funny"
    -Tom Cruise, A FEW GOOD MEN

    Michale.....

  11. [11] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    the term "tea-bagger," as i mentioned, was coined by maddow in response to fox's on-air gaffe, where they encouraged people to "tea-bag obama" and "tea-bag the white house," and these are direct quotes.

    "oh come on, it was damn funny."

  12. [12] 
    Michale wrote:

    the term "tea-bagger," as i mentioned, was coined by maddow in response to fox's on-air gaffe, where they encouraged people to "tea-bag obama" and "tea-bag the white house," and these are direct quotes.

    And yet, how often was it used by Democrats up to Obama, to describe the Tea Party people??

    I don't even have to bring up all the cries and screams of RACIST and RACISM that was hurled at the Tea Party....

    That would be too easy an argument to make.. :D

    No, I think rational responses to the Tea Party amongst Lefties can only be found here on CW.COM

    "oh come on, it was damn funny."

    Nice one! :D

    Michale.....

  13. [13] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    here's a link to the video:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OLsKt4O4Yw8

  14. [14] 
    dsws wrote:

    ""governing" is to "campaigning" as "being married" is to "courting." "

    YMMV (Your marriage may vary.)

    For us, the wedding didn't mark a major change in the relationship, but a change in our public status. Taking our vows wasn't making a new commitment so much as it was stating the obvious.

  15. [15] 
    GlynnisI wrote:

    Chris,
    Please read the Washington Post's article on the Wake Co., NC (newly Tea Party-run) School Bd. and their decisions to return to "neighborhood schools" to cut funds that have been expended for busing since Wake Co. was finally integrated in the early 1980s. It's a prime example of Tea Party governance AND an example of why education isn't improving. Some people are still fighting battles from the 1960s instead of looking to a good future for our children.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/01/11/AR2011011107423.html

  16. [16] 
    Chris Weigant wrote:

    GlynnisI -

    I will check it out (I saw the headline earlier, but haven't read it yet), thanks.

    I think the Tea Party's main flaw with the general public is going to be their insistence on looking backwards. Just in general, in politics, it's better to be forward-looking than backward. And, so far, the TP seems to be bent on moving America decidedly backwards and not forwards. We'll see how it all plays out when Congress returns...

    -CW

Comments for this article are closed.