Fingers Burnt in a Foreign Fire?
The Guardian frequently talks sense and their US election coverage has been informative, but what the hell were they thinking here? At the time of announcing this campaign several days ago I imagined the entire readership staring in disbelief at the paper over breakfast, mouthing "Jesus" to themselves as they tried to take it in. I suspect I was right.
My reaction then and now is to assume they knew precisely what they were doing, and I wouldn't be at all surprised if they had planned space in the G2 supplement for the avalanche of furious responses well in advance. But why would they mount this whole campaign? Surely the traditional PR battle hymn that there's no such thing as bad publicity isn't at work here? On the other hand, roping in a bunch of celebrity thinkers and public-eye academics to write some of the letters tends to bear this out.
The idea that this is nothing more than an exercise in chest-beating and attention seeking is worrying, and the fact this campaign attracted the condemnation of many US newspapers means it will likely end up causing more harm than good to Kerry's chances. And being perceived as arrogant in both countries is hardly going to help reverse the Guardian's falling sales figures.
But let us not get carried away here. Sure the Guardian will enjoy wallowing in pariah status for a few days, and perhaps there are deeper reasons to be mined from their strange mistake, but once the dust has settled we'll look back on it as just another election footnote with no lasting impact. If three highly charged 90 minute slanging matches between Bush and Kerry can't swing the election either way, a bunch of hectoring letters sent to a small town in Ohio certainly won't.
My reaction then and now is to assume they knew precisely what they were doing, and I wouldn't be at all surprised if they had planned space in the G2 supplement for the avalanche of furious responses well in advance. But why would they mount this whole campaign? Surely the traditional PR battle hymn that there's no such thing as bad publicity isn't at work here? On the other hand, roping in a bunch of celebrity thinkers and public-eye academics to write some of the letters tends to bear this out.
The idea that this is nothing more than an exercise in chest-beating and attention seeking is worrying, and the fact this campaign attracted the condemnation of many US newspapers means it will likely end up causing more harm than good to Kerry's chances. And being perceived as arrogant in both countries is hardly going to help reverse the Guardian's falling sales figures.
But let us not get carried away here. Sure the Guardian will enjoy wallowing in pariah status for a few days, and perhaps there are deeper reasons to be mined from their strange mistake, but once the dust has settled we'll look back on it as just another election footnote with no lasting impact. If three highly charged 90 minute slanging matches between Bush and Kerry can't swing the election either way, a bunch of hectoring letters sent to a small town in Ohio certainly won't.
posted by Jamie at 10:57 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home