RNC, Media: Obama is Cashing in on "Auschwitz Cachet"
by Chris Edelson
The Seminal

Media outlets are flogging a truly bizarre story today, involving Obama's mistaken reference to his great-uncle helping to liberate Auschwitz instead of Buchenwald.  As usual, the media helpfully serves as uncommenting stenographer for Republicans' outlandish claims, including the assertion that Obama's mix-up somehow raises questions about his "readiness to lead".  The Politico's Ben Smith (among others) dutifully typed up the RNC's hyperbolic attack, essentially without comment.  Would it kill him, or others writing about this idiocy, to point out any or all of the following?

• Obama has nothing to gain by claiming his great-uncle was at Auschwitz instead of Buchenwald–it's not like he's grasping for that "Auschwitz cachet" that other death camps lack. This was obviously an inadvertent mistake. There is no reasonable way to conclude that Obama was seeking some kind of advantage by intentionally mixing up these names. (One of the commenters on Ben Smith's post noted as much, writing that: "Only a hardened ideologue can sustain a rant about Obama mixing up Auschwitz and Buchenwald.")
• McCain recently made a similar "gaffe" this week, claiming he is running for the nonexistent office of commander in chief (I'd argue McCain's word choice was actually meaningful, but let's assume for argument's sake that the misstatements are similar).  The media was largely silent about McCain's error–the only references I can find are this short post on CNN and my own piece.  McCain makes mistakes like this all the time (again, I would argue some of his slips are more revealing–e.g. his repeated mixing up of Sunni and Shi'ite), and the mistakes are usually met with silence.
• The RNC's breathless response to this non-event is reminiscent of the frenzy that boiled over in 2000 when Al Gore mistakenly said he had visited a disaster site with then-FEMA head James Lee Witt.  As Al Franken has pointed out, Gore had visited 17 other sites with Witt and simply made an inadvertent mistake–to paraphrase Franken, it's not like Gore was looking to cash in on all that James Lee Witt buzz.
• The media should ask itself, when these "gaffes" occur–is this an inadvertent mistake, or an intentional attempt to mislead?  One way to get to an answer is by considering whether the speaker has anything to gain from the misstatement (if not, the miststatement may simply be inadvertent).  Other points to consider are whether the miststatement reveals a lack of knowledge, or is more likely a simple slip, and whether the misstep continues to happen even after the speaker is corrected.

Republicans understand how to manipulate the media–they know that they can make any statement, no matter how outlandish, how blatantly false, and the media will dutifully write it up, generally without comment.  Obama almost certainly understands this as well and chooses not to engage in such deception.  I hope his choice works out ok–he certainly won't get any help from media elites.

Recommend this article...

Did you enjoy this article? Please bookmark it onto:

Be first to comment this article

Write Comment

Please keep the topic of messages relevant to the subject of the article. Personal verbal attacks will be deleted. Please don't use comments to plug your web site. Such material will be removed. Just ensure to *Refresh* your browser for a new security code to be displayed prior to clicking on the 'Send' button. Keep in mind that the above process only applies if you simply entered the wrong security code.
Name:
E-mail
Homepage
Title:
BBCode:
Comment:
Code:*
	I wish to be contacted by email regarding additional comments

Powered by AkoComment Tweaked Special Edition v.1.4.4