Mickey Kaus is in top form in this dissection of the politics (and political theater) of the ports-deal fiasco:

I’m sure the fuss about the Dubai contract is overstated. How could it not be? But that doesn’t mean there aren’t legitimate worries underlying it. The Bushies should address them instead of explaining, “Shut up, hicks.” Fortunately, when Republicans try that ethnic guilt-trip trick (as Bush did with Harriet Miers, and continually tries to do on immigration) it’s seldom effective. …

I am neutral in the People vs. George W. Bush: the matter of some American ports moving into “the hands of” a multinational company based in Dubai (an enemy in 9/11). The story has caught the attention of pundits and politicians and regular folk alike. It has “stuck” (in the Gladwell-ian** sense), and that makes it particularlly interesting from an infotainment dissector’s point of view.

Stepping back from that perspective for a moment and into the consumer’s shoes, it’s clear I’m in the “regular folks” category on this one. I know nothing about port security. I am a little surprised at the furor over it, and I don’t quite know what to make of it, but I have no interest in delving into the arcana in order to become more informed. Still, others are making such a fuss that I wonder if I shouldn’t be more worried about it. Etc.
I am only a casual listener on this story. It occurs to me that this makes me the perfect target of infotainment:

I seek out “stories” about the issue–the ones closest at hand, and there so many different story vehicles to choose from–magazines, TV, Internet-based publications (blogs and online news aggregators, newspaper websites, etc), books (if I can wait that long).

Then I choose the kind of stories I want to hear (written or audio or video, long-form or short-form, self-directed [Internet-based] or spoon-fed [TV-based], real-time or time-shifted, real or fictive, fiction-tinged reality [documentary and/or memoir] or hard-core reality ["news" and long-form journalism and serious nonfiction], comedic or “serious”, etc. ).

I also choose the frame of the narratives I will hear: (rah-rah-we’re-the-best [FOX] or we’re-in-such-deep-shit [CNN] or…well, you get the idea. Let’s stick with CNN, which is where I often land, because it offers some form of news-based programming during the hours I’m around the house.

From the point of view of an infotainment dissector who has eaten a diet consisting entirely of CNN and blogs on this matter: the ports mess is a PR disaster for Bush: he is being attacked not only by the Democrats and the Republicans but also by the Man on the Street (who has been Bush’s secret weapon up until now: Bush seemed to know–or he knew how to mirror–how “regular people” think (in stereotypes, particularly with themselves featured as the good guys)–and he is unashamed to pander to them).

This ports fiasco follows close on the heels of Dick Cheney’s above-it-all disregard for both the national press and his boss after accidentally shooting his friend during a hunt. He thinks the usual rules don’t apply to him: that’s the “sticky” part of the Narrative-in-the-Making.

Up until now I have marveled, in a cold-eyed way, at the ruthless efficiency–and efficacy–of the Bush administration’s message-delivery system (due in large part to its superior PR skills, and its enthusiastic belief in PR).

At this point, however, even I believe that George W. Bush is a lame duck.

———————-

**Malcolm Gladwell, The Tipping Point (a work whose ideas have helped crystallize much of my thinking in the last few years). More about “stickiness” another time.

Hint: “truthiness” has “stickiness”… for now…but not for long.