Pushing back on the "celebrity" label

If Obama had suggested Cindy McCain should compete in a topless Miss Buffalo Chip contest while her husband campaigned in Sturgis the outrage would probably end his bid for the White House - he's not a big enough celebrity to weather that backlash - but John McCain gets a chuckle from the Harley riders and a pass in the press. Why? Because he's a powerful, influential celebrity in DC. But you've got to wonder: Why does he want us to think Obama is, too?

Let’s face it, the best defense is a good offense, and sex sells. A money scandal pales compared to a juicy, salacious story involving a celebrity, after all - just ask Senator Larry Craig - and McCain's campaign needed to distract from that gaffe so we wouldn't all stay focused on Cindy McCain's bosom. So let's grab attention with names like Paris Hilton and try to connect Barack to sexy young celebrities.

The organizations that provide us “news” are driven by their need to pay for their staff and buildings just like any other business. They benefit from increasingly timely, now near-instantaneous feedback about what people who use their “service” want to learn about. Higher ratings translate rapidly into higher advertising revenues, and so they cater to the whims of whoever drives their audience share up, so despite the conflict of interest, commercial media organizations are well-served by echoing even mis-information about the campaign.

John McCain said he’s proud of his ads comparing Barack Obama to Britney Spears and Paris Hilton. He wants you to think you’re just caught up by a “celebrity” and don’t really want change in this country. If that’s the sort of leadership you want for the U.S.A., if giving a consummate D.C. insider even more power - and celebrity - matches your view of where this country should go for the next four years, you should vote for him in November.

read more | digg story