by Doctor Science
The Romney campaign has been running ads saying Obama is planning to remove the work requirement for welfare, so "your" money goes to "those" people. As reported by Ben Smith at Buzzfeed [emphasis mine]:
"Our most effective ad is our welfare ad," a top television advertising strategist for Romney, Ashley O'Connor, said at a forum Tuesday hosted by ABCNews and Yahoo! News. "It's new information."David S. Bernstein of the Boston Phoenix tweeted:
The Washington Post's "Fact Checker" awarded Romney's ad "four Pinocchios," a measure Romney pollster Neil Newhouse dismissed.
"Fact checkers come to this with their own sets of thoughts and beliefs, and we’re not going to let our campaign be dictated by fact checkers," he said. The fact-checkers — whose institutional rise has been a feature of the cycle — have "jumped the shark," he added after the panel.
Dear media critics: OK, entire news media called Romney’s welfare attack a lie. Campaign still pushing it. Now what?Media critic Jay Rosen confesses himself baffled, and asks for ideas. He admits that the Obama campaign has released ads that are untrue and/or exaggerated, but says: [emphasis mine]
... in my view they do not compare to the use of falsehood and deceptive claims in the Romney 2012 campaign. Nor is there anything coming from the Obama machine that is like the open defiance of fact-checking we have seen from Romney and his team. I don’t think it’s a character issue but a kind of post-truth strategy in electioneering, which is itself a response to huge tensions within the Republican Party. I see the situation as highly asymmetrical, with just enough on both sides to make “both sides do it” sound plausible.In the comments, I asked:
I also recognize that this conclusion is itself bitterly contested by other critics looking at the same facts and by opponents of Obama. Or it just sounds ridiculous to them, a substitution of political preferences for fair-minded analysis. That response, which flows to me constantly over social media, is part of the reality of culture war politics, media bias division.
Can a TV network legally refuse to run a campaign ad that is a lie? Can a network legally refuse to run *any* ad from an organization that is currently releasing lying ads?I can't imagine that any network would have the guts to do that, of course -- campaign money is too much of a gold mine for them. But I don't know if there's any other way to counter the level of mendacious marketing Citizens United permits.
illusionist elements were employed, blurring the distinction between the viewer's own sphere of reality and fiction: the pictures are presented on canvases painted in trompe l'oeil, suspended by cherubs in an equally fictitious painted architectural frame. So it's a picture about Truth, presented as a trompe l'oeil deception. I don't think Rubens really intended that level of meta ...