Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I remember during the Reagan and bush presidency the media outlets were all trying to outdo one another with their tear jerking report about the strife of the homeless, now that things are even worse, we do not hear any reports about the homeless.
The obvious response fwould be that the media is shelving all those reports because 0bama is president, and they want to paint as rosy a picture as possible for the upcoming elections in November. Could it be that there are fewer homeless today, or are we just unconcerned for their plight, hence no motivations exist to report on them?
I remember during the Reagan and bush presidency the media outlets were all trying to outdo one another with their tear jerking report about the strife of the homeless, now that things are even worse, we do not hear any reports about the homeless.
The obvious response fwould be that the media is shelving all those reports because 0bama is president, and they want to paint as rosy a picture as possible for the upcoming elections in November. Could it be that there are fewer homeless today, or are we just unconcerned for their plight, hence no motivations exist to report on them?
They're too busy covering Health Care Reform IMHO (better ratings).
The obvious response fwould be that the media is shelving all those reports because 0bama is president, and they want to paint as rosy a picture as possible for the upcoming elections in November.
The media conspiracy doesn't pass the common sense test.
There is no way you get thousands of newspapers, networks, and local news affiliates with tens of thousands of people generating content in on a wide-ranging conspiracy to make a President look good, especially not without someone speaking up about it.
If they are painting a rosy picture why is it I could easily find your a dozen negative articles from major media sources about the war, economy, etc.
The homeless rate rose in the 70s and especially the 80s and 90s because of what was later uncovered - the Housing & Urban Development scandal(s). Basically the top officials in the HUD (most Pierce) abused their positions and deprived funds from a lot of Section 8 and like developments of funds and funneled them into personal accounts or used them for unrelated programs. Nobody knew about this until 1990, after Reagan had already left office, and the observable result was a spike in homelessness during and after the early 80s recession. Of course, Reagan had little to do with what happened, in fact he apparently did not even know his own HUD secretary, much less the daily happenings of the agency. However, the lack of oversight from his administration is the real issue and most probable reason why the media was so vicious.
Homelessness was also high in the 90s, despite a decent economy. However, the media was much more favorable to Clinton than it had been to Reagan over the issue. Clinton's two HUD secretaries were no better than Pierce, although most people tended to ignore problems under Clinton. That, and homelessness has generally fallen out of interest of the American public, which is rather sad testament to our attention spans and what issues we consider important. And really, this is probably the reason why Obama nor Bush or even Clinton were trashed over the issue.
I remember during the Reagan and bush presidency the media outlets were all trying to outdo one another with their tear jerking report about the strife of the homeless, now that things are even worse, we do not hear any reports about the homeless.
The obvious response fwould be that the media is shelving all those reports because 0bama is president, and they want to paint as rosy a picture as possible for the upcoming elections in November. Could it be that there are fewer homeless today, or are we just unconcerned for their plight, hence no motivations exist to report on them?
Very good question and it has crossed my mind as well lately.
A couple of years ago the growing homeless camps in Sacramento and Reno were in the news regularly, but I've seen nothing about them for a good while. Hard to believe they've gone away since unemployment has gotten only worse in those areas.
If they reported how BAD the homeless problem is, the polititions would not look good since all the money grabbing programs they push fail. They want the world's image of us as weathly and prosperious. It then justifies the redistribute the wealth to other countries.
Really if you look at what has been going on for many years, we neglect our own and give generously to other countries.
I remember during the Reagan and bush presidency the media outlets were all trying to outdo one another with their tear jerking report about the strife of the homeless, now that things are even worse, we do not hear any reports about the homeless.
Might I suggest that the news media is about as fickly as a prepubescent teenager.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
