MISSING IN ACTION

BY CHOOSING ONLY THREE HOURS TO COVER, THE BROADCAST MEDIA HAVE PROVEN THEMSELVES UNWORTHY OF THE PUBLIC TRUST

On Monday, a remarkable speech was made from the convention floor. It was impassioned. It showed the President's strength in wartime and provided a powerful and stirring defense of the necessity of going to war in Iraq. The speaker provided stark reminders of the world before Saddam's demise, and eloquently made the case that freeing the Iraqi people was worth it.

And none of the networks covered it.

No, I am not talking about Rudy Giuliani, though the three hours this week that ABC, CBS, and NBC deemed worthy of their attention did not include his excellent remarks. And, obviously, I am not speaking of John McCain, who also did not see the light of network day, as the big three chose no coverage on Monday night.

The speaker was an Iraqi woman, whose name I cannot recall and could not spell even if I could. Her name, as I'm sure she would agree, is not the issue, for she spoke for millions. Standing on a stage before thousands of delegates, this woman proudly, carefully, and gratefully recited the triumphs of the Bush administration over the oppressive madman that once controlled her country.

She was not deterred by the violence. She was not bowed down by fear. She was not complaining about the slowness of progress. Instead, she reminded us all of the unconscionable waste of talent and life that Saddam wrought during his unholy reign.

It was an important moment to see. But the networks don't care about the content of their broadcast. Their only concern is that they don't interfere too much with the reality shows that have become their bread and butter.

How ironic that the big three networks have, in one sense, gotten the message that real life is interesting to Americans. And, yet, given the opportunity to broadcast the real workings of actual government, they have better things to do.

Except that they don't. There is nothing better they could have done than to broadcast both conventions, gavel to gavel, as C-SPAN did.

The networks did not show John McCain or Rudy Giuliani or Bill Frist's wonderful defense of the president's health policies and embryonic stem cell research position. They chose to ignore the young Republicans on Wednesday afternoon as they were addressed by Angie Harmon (of Law and Order) and her husband or by the winner of an MTV contest called "Stand Up and Holla." They didn't show the tributes to those lost in 9/11 or the speeches by those who have lost loved ones in the combat aspect of the war on terror.

Most voters probably don't know who Ed Gillespie, the chairman of the Party, is. If they are watching the convention on one of the Big Three, they still don't. Gillespie came in with a mock-SNL opening segment, "Live from New York, it's the Republican National Convention!" which showed some of that humor that the commentators keep complaining they aren't seeing from the Republicans. They also missed speeches by Dennis Hastert, Mark Racicot, and Lindsey Graham, and an amazing skewering of the Hollywood left by Ron Silver. Not to mention a prayer by one of the dearest figures of the Christian right, Joni Erickson Tada. And that was just on Monday, a day the networks declined to even look at.

On Tuesday, they didn't show Elizabeth Dole, Sam Brownback, Elizabeth Hasselback (who, I'm told, is on The View and gave a stirring speech about breast cancer research), Princella Smith (the MTV winner referenced above), and Secretary of Education Rod Paige. On Wednesday, instead of covering anything before the "major" speeches (as defined by the networks), they will deprive voters of Rick Santorum, Mitch McConnell, Elaine Chao (who, by the way, is married to McConnell), Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney, and Michael Reagan, adopted son of the late president. Apparently, NBC's "Dateline" puff on Jane Pauley and the Drew Carey Show are more important to the voting public than the public policy speeches of any of those people.

And, finally, tomorrow, the major networks will ignore a tribute to Olympic medal winners, with Dorothy Hamill and Mary Lou Retton, a speech by Lynn Swann, and music by Donnie McClurkin and Michael W. Smith. Evidently "must see TV" isn't about the imperatives of citizenship, and the popularity of "reality programming" hasn't reached the political arena yet. Oh, wait--there is a reality program where they are PRETENDING to pick a candidate, but I guess the real thing doesn't have the demographics the nets are looking for.

This is all fairly disgusting, and fairly new. When I was growing up (don't do the math), the political conventions were required viewing in my household, and I know we didn't have cable television back then. Instead, the networks actually took some time to COVER what was going on in politics, rather than their current habit of just sitting back and sneering at it. If you look to ABC, NBC, or CBS for your political news, you will be woefully uninformed. There is just no way to sandwich complex political issues (nevermind debate!) into the few hours the networks devote (and I use the term loosely) to news. Especially if you still need to have time for Bush-bashing "human interest" stories.

The FCC requires that networks set aside a certain amount of time for "public interest" programming. If they don't, they don't get their license renewed. I propose that we go back to the old days, by force if necessary. What would it take to have the FCC and the FEC require that those who hold public licenses carry ALL of BOTH conventions? Is that not "public interest" programming, every bit as much as those invitations to write to Pueblo, Colorado? Or the unending reminders to do smart and healthy things and talk to your kids?

It's not as though that makes the political process inescapable. Those who want to watch re-runs of the Lucy show could probably find it on cable or paid channels.

And that's the key. As long as those channels that people can watch for free in some areas make the political process mysterious and unreachable, those who have no access to cable (perhaps because they can't afford it) will remain horrifically uninformed about the process, the issues, and the people involved. They will be at the mercy of those who screech loudest and those whose strategy is to keep the poor ignorant so they will keep voting for the party of dependency and hand-out. I won't mention any names here.

The airwaves belong to the people. That's why the FCC grants licenses to tv and radio stations. But, increasingly, the people's airwaves belong only to the elite media. Ironically, thoughtful and truthful examination of the issues are becoming available only to those who can pay for their television signals. If the networks are not willing to serve the people, by covering the most important events taking place in the nation this year, then they should have those licenses revoked.