About us Login Get email updates
County Fair
Print

Can the press please define "showdown"

April 04, 2009 11:25 am ET by Eric Boehlert

As in Michelle Obama's fashion "showdown" with France's First Lady Carla Sarkozy.

The phrase appeared everywhere in the press, but what does it even mean?  Were journalists expecting a West Side Story-type dance-off in front of the Palais Rohan in Strasbourg, where the two first ladies met? And does it strike anyone else as slightly sexist, as in the two fashionable, and powerful, women were going to rumble (i.e. engage in a cat fight) over who had the nicest wardrobe?

And did we mention the phrase was everywhere in the serious press?:

--"The meeting between Mrs. Obama and Mrs. Sarkozy may not have been the showdown that fashion bloggers expected." (NYT)

--"Michelle's style showdown in France." (WashTimes headline)

--"A First Lady Style Showdown Not Exactly" (WSJ headline)  

--"For the real showcase showdown in fashion this week, check in Saturday, when the French and American first ladies visit Strasbourg Cathedral in France." (Chicago Tribune)

In general, there's nothing wrong with discussing or writing about what the first lady wears, or noting that her fashion choices are being widely commented on. But that kind of water cooler talk shouldn't be dressed up as news, as it clearly was this week. (A week in which the press, following the Obamas overseas, wallowed in trivia.)

The examples are endless, but here's just one. On Anderson Cooper 360 Friday night, the CNN program offered up an "Up Close" (i.e. in-depth) segment about Michelle Obama's meeting with France's first lady. After detailing which designer each woman wore on Friday, the CNN reporter announced that they were "choices that say a lot about who these first ladies of fashion are." [Emphasis added.]

Don't the choices simply say a lot about who the women's favorite designers are? On no, according to CNN's news report, the fashion choices represented much, much more:

It's no surprise the clothes Mrs. Obama and Madame Sarkozy choose become messages in themselves.

Please. I understand that fashion is more than just the clothes people wear, and that it can reflect a culture and a personality. I realize that fashion is an art form. And that's what culture critics are for; to mine that territory. But that's not what the press did this week. The 'serious' press, anxious to latch onto a conveyor belt of easy stories, pretended the reason Michelle Obama's wardrobe deserved so much press attention was because the topic's so important. That it's newsworthy.

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by mk3872 (April 04, 2009 12:48 pm ET)
         
      Leave it to the cable news channels to completely miss the lies about WMD and the financial meltdown but spend hours of in-depth coverage of the first lady's clothes
      Report Abuse
    • Author by carlileb5935 (April 04, 2009 5:14 pm ET)
         
      It's Entertainment Tonight everywhere now. What a poisonous lot these people are. Stupid people begetting more stupid people. Is there a solution?
      Report Abuse
    • Author by MickD (April 05, 2009 6:56 am ET)
         
      Some MSNBC weekend news bimbette was having an external debate on-air yesterday with herself (and some far flung reporter) on the "justification" of talking about Michelle's clothes, etc. She satisfied herself in the argument (with herself) that people ARE interested in this, as well "as the serious matters involving the president". And the hole went deeper from there.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by mrhebert74 (April 05, 2009 11:29 am ET)
         

      What makes me laugh is not that the press have to justify covering fashion, trump it up into something newsworthy, but that they don't realize that MOST of their coverage is not "news."

      Report Abuse
    • Author by welterwill998306 (April 05, 2009 2:30 pm ET)
         

      WTF, is there no end to the ultra-contradictory disected news being put out by news stations claiming to have fair and balanced news coverage. Propaganda thats purpose is to shed light on propaganda that doesn't exist. If there is cheap shots to be made on Obama

      they have been dismissed for this vile spew. Good for democrats though, and thats a calming part to all this .The republicans boat hit an iceberg and haven't seemed to hit bottom yet, or have they?

      Report Abuse