Send in the Drones - Essay Example

A look at the coverage of the Lamont Lieberman senate race in Connecticut will confirm that pack journalism is alive and well and even more void of any creativity, insight, adjectives, or shame. Both Reuters and The Associated Press ran several stories in the hours after the election. The stories echoed the same adjectives and scenarios as they spoke of the anger, anti-war sentiment, and Lieberman's closeness with Bush. The wire services had indeed taken the stand that the vote in the Democratic primary in the land of steady habits was a referendum on the President.

The major papers in New York, Los Angeles, and Chicago echoed this story. Yet, as reported by Murray on August 9, 2006 in The Washington Post there were other issues on the minds of Connecticut voters such as labor unions, free trade, and women's rights. The mob mentality had left these issues behind because the story that had the legs was the story on the war. Sometimes you can see the mob move by just looking at the sheer volume of coverage on an event. By the first week of August 2006 the major news outlets had the nation riveted on the Democratic primary and focused on the race between Lieberman and Lamont.

The Associated Press was pumping out 10 stories a day covering the race and the major dailies were following suit. The NY Times was contributing about 4 a day and the Washington Post was adding another 2 (LexisNexis). By the first week of October 2006 the AP had dropped to less than 10 stories for the entire week. That week, the Washington Post did not even cover the non-event. The last week of October 2006, with the election drawing near, had again seen a modest increase in coverage by both the AP and the New York Times (LexisNexis).

By the beginning of September the news of Lieberman and Lamont was already getting scarce. It was often hard to locate the source of the story, but it was certainly getting incestual. Similar stories from Chicago and New York indicate that the news was being drawn from a common pool. The New York Times led a story on September 2, 2006 with, "An independent group, Vets for Freedom, will begin sponsoring television commercials [.] thanking him (Lieberman) for his support of the war in Iraq" (Medina, 5).

On September 6, 2006 the Chicago Sun Times relayed the same story that led off with, "Vets for Freedom, an independent group [.] will air an ad in Connecticut [.] thank the incumbent for backing the conflict" (Miga). It's obvious that both papers were drinking from the same well.A September 9, 2006 AP story begins, "[.] Ned Lamont, who recently denounced Sen. Joe Lieberman for his public scolding of President Clinton over the Monica Lewinsky affair, lauded the senator at the time for his eloquence and moral authority" (Reitz).

The New York Times of the same date worded it this way, "Ned Lamont, who this week chastised Senator Joseph I. Lieberman for his public rebuke of President Clinton during the Monica Lewinsky scandal, wrote to Mr. Lieberman at the time praising the eloquence of his speech on the Senate floor" (Medina, 4). The NY Times took full credit for the story with no acknowledgment for the AP material. The majors had run out of wire stories and the Times was lost for words, but they hadn't lost their thesaurus.

Unfortunately, the chain of evidence is not well