Do pundits really know what’s best?

STAFF EDITORIAL

What kind of person are you? Where do your ideologies lie?

Are you a Scarborough person? Maybe you’re an Olbermann person or, on the other side of the coin, an O’Reilly person. People ask you what you think about politics or current events and you may find yourself saying that you tend to agree with Dobbs or Matthews.

It’s a sign of the times and we’re all a part of it. The news is no longer simply the news. Now it arrives to us in the form of an opinion, molding every Joe and Jane into a Hannity or a Colmes.

To most this may just seem like an afterthought, as normal as the invention of television itself. But take a step back and look at the big picture of the United States on Sept. 17, 2008.

When people tell you that this year’s election is one of the most important in our nation’s history, they’re not lying. The deficit has reached an almost imaginary level; our troops are still fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, waiting for someone to come up with the next stage of the plan; we face an energy crisis that will see gas climb over five dollars per gallon; and, most recently, we’re playing the “missile game” with Russia all over again.

Our next president, and his administration, faces a series of challenges that are unenviable to say the least. Whether John McCain or Barack Obama is the right person for the job is our decision to make.

So where is this going?

It is not a leap of faith to assume that people vote based on the opinions they hear. Not to sound judgmental, but if you’re getting your news from “The Daily Show” with Jon Stewart, the GOP can kiss your vote goodbye. Likewise, Obama’s probably not your guy if you partake in the “No Spin Zone.” This way of thinking is dangerous.

Why? Because it’s no longer about YOUR vote; it’s about how Cooper or Hume votes. Once people limit their viewing to one opinion on one cable news show, the host’s opinion is the only one that matters – not yours. It’s as if the “punditry guard” is telling us, “Don’t bother with the details, we’ll tell you how you should vote.”

The good news is we can do something about this, and we don’t have to film our own pundit shows on YouTube to do it. Worry about the details, seek answers to your own questions, and, most importantly, broaden your media horizons.

If you’re interested to know the truth about what a certain candidate’s tax plan means to you, do the leg work and seek more than one opinion. Think of the news media as if it is plotting points on a graph — remember high school algebra? Whether you’re listening to CNN’s take or reading The New York Times take, each outlet plots its own separate and unique point.

While no point may lie in the same place, together they populate the same area of the political landscape. It’s up to us to take that data and apply it to what WE think. Not what Rove or Stephanopoulos thinks.

In this day and age where every paper, magazine, and channel has its own website, it is far too easy for us not to make our own decisions. As you’re deciding who to vote for, seek the opinions of at least four different media outlets. If you’re an MSNBC person, see what Fox has to say. You don’t have to agree with it, just add it to your perspective — your plot graph.

Be happy that there is something you can do to be a part of this election.  You’re as much a part of this process as the guy with the perfect TV hair.

Instead of choosing a pundit, choose a candidate.