Puzzlement

He makes good copy.

My opinions are not relevant to what I do.

   It is a puzzlement. News media are now being criticized for extensive coverage of a presidential candidate, based on the idea that he is little more than an entertainer, and a master manipulator of the news cycle. The accusation is that the Republican Party and lax journalists have created this media monster, who is now out of control.
   All this raises the question of whether the candidacy should have been ignored in the first place. Answer: No. But there could have been limits.
   Flash and dash make some stories easy to cover, and outrageous acts and comments make some stories even easier. It takes little effort on the part of reporters to uncover a crisp, exciting angle to a story or a candidate's daily actions when said candidate is an expert at manipulating the media to call attention to himself.
   But the Five Ws of journalism -- Who, What, Where, When and Why -- apply not only to elements of a story, but equally to a candidate. The Who, Where and When are easy enough. The What can be a challenge, but not when the candidate splashes a diatribe about anything and everything, spiced with insult, vilification and abuse of opponents or anyone else who disagrees.
   In short, it makes good copy, as the old newsroom saying goes, and spices up the story even when there are few specifics about the candidate's policies or positions.
   The most difficult of the Five Ws, however, is the Why. It's easy enough to write about Who the candidate is, identify Where and When the candidate speaks, and report What the candidate says.
   But there's more to it than that. For example, is What the candidate says true or false, or misleading, or irrelevant, or has little or no substance, even though it may be entertaining?
   Most important, however, is the Why. Why does the candidate say or do what he does? What motivation is there, and How does the candidate plan to implement his policies -- if in fact he speaks of them at all -- when and if he is elected?
  
   Currently, there has been much lamenting of the media's role in enabling the rise in popularity of the leading Republican candidate for the presidency. The complaint has been raised that You-Know-Who is unfit, unqualified, and even dangerous, and should not be considered a legitimate candidate.
   It's too late to take back all the news coverage devoted to the candidate since last summer, and it's not relevant to claim that journalism should not have covered his campaign at all.
   The point is that he is a candidate, he leads in many surveys, he has many supporters who show up at campaign rallies, and who believe what he says, regardless of news reports detailing the absurdities of many of his more coarse remarks, not to mention their validity or truthfulness.
   Should the media have ignored him from the first? No, since he was and is a candidate. Should the media have been more critical earlier in the campaign, or given less coverage to him and more to several other candidates? Perhaps, but You-Know-Who is a more colorful and entertaining speaker, and that makes a reporter's job easier.
   Can it be said that many reporters are basically lazy, and chase after the most flashy and entertaining of those involved in any particular story?  Absolutely.
   Should the news media have ignored You-Know-Who, basing their judgment on whether he was a viable candidate? No, because that's not their job.
   Whether he was or is a good candidate, a qualified candidate, or even a dangerous candidate can be shown through continuing coverage of the candidate's speeches, comments and actions.
   The danger for reporters is falling for the glamorous and entertaining aspects of the campaign, and not detailing the mundane details and specifics of any policy plan for government.
   A candidate cannot and should not be ignored. But every candidate deserves to have his comments, actions and speeches recorded and reported, so that readers, viewers and voters have sufficient information to decide whether to support any particular candidate.