Media coverage vital to elections

The Romanian news media might be laughing at the United States. For months, the American press has followed the presidential candidates and, even now, Texas Gov. George W. Bush and Vice President Al Gore are making front page news in many papers. \nSome have complained the media didn't cover the issues, devoted too much time to the "horse race" aspects of the contest and went on a media blitz when a winner had not emerged Nov. 7. \n Talking heads studied and discussed aspects of the election ad nauseum. Americans had trouble getting away from the election. Whatever the charge, the election was on the minds of the people and journalists made sure they covered every aspect of this unprecedented event in American history.\nThat's not the case in Romania. Newspapers throughout the country decided on the less-is-more approach to covering the election. This is a practice that is not only unprofessional, but is a disservice to society at large and could compromise the political situation in Romania.\nJust four days before the runoff between former President Ion Iliescu and far-right candidate Corneliu Vadim Tudor, four major dailies kept the story off the front page, and only one gave it any prominence. The daily Adevarul chose to focus on the Bucharest mayor's dispute with government employees living in low-rent, state-provided housing. Jurnalul National's front page alleged fraud in the purchase of new ambulances. \nPart of the reluctance to cover the race is the perception among intellectuals that the country faces two unpleasant choices: Iliescu, a former communist, and Tudor, an upstart radical with a record of insulting Jews and ethnic minorities. After the first round Nov. 26, when Iliescu and Tudor led the race between 12 candidates, the daily Evenimentul Zilei said Romania was left with a choice between "AIDS or cancer." The feeling seems widespread among Romania's media trendsetters. \nOf course, not everyone thinks ignoring the race is a sound strategy.\nTudor himself complained of the lack of media coverage. A politician being angry because of lack of attention from the media? Say it isn't so!\nUnder election rules, both candidates get to address the nation for one hour on national television. Tudor used his hour to pledge a war on the "mafia state,'' accuse the media of using "Stalinist'' tactics and deny being an extremist. \nYet the story of this speech was largely ignored. A senior Western-educated newspaper editor, speaking on condition of anonymity, said he wasn't proud of suppressing the story, but felt a duty to stop Tudor. \nEven without the media, the race is a subject of debate on the streets and in offices and homes. But there is palpable bitterness that the centrist, reform-minded candidates who might have served as antidotes to Iliescu and Tudor were knocked out of the running Nov. 26. Some people said they don't care about the runoff because of the poor quality of candidates. \nIt's one thing for the public not to care; it's another for the media to be apathetic. The job of a journalist, at its most basic level, is to report on society, and a major component of society is the government. Without the Fourth Estate, all kinds of political corruption would go unchecked and democracy on the whole would be in jeopardy. \nJournalists have powerful voices, and when they choose to remain silent, the well-being of the country is at stake. The news media has committed some egregious crimes, but for all its negative aspects, the news media has done more good than bad. \nSo, if you wish the media would spend less time on the elections, consider the situation in Romania. Frankly, the U.S. media cares about the well-being of the country.