It has become increasingly clear to me that the world we inhabit grows ever more technologically dependent. One can recognize how the process of choosing government officials has been adjusted over time, and has succumbed to its fate of being swallowed whole by varied modes of media communication. Newspapers, radio programs, podcasts, television advertisements, and the occasional streaming broadband Oprah episode have become intrinsically melded into the very essence filling this bowl of soupy morsels of digestible information—otherwise known as the presidential campaign.

Over time, our culture has slowly jettisoned a certain dimension of communication that sustained the protection of journalistic freedom—the protection of the expression of proper "truth" and actual knowledge—by confusing the essence of the message, with the assumed “reality” of the medium itself. Bear with me…

Television, that insidious black box in the corner of your living room, has become the cornerstone of modern media technology. The internet is an extension of the same principle, i.e. visual presentation of edited material, produced for mental consumption and psychological satisfaction. Modern media has done far more than merely bequeath entertainment and information to the masses—it has galvanized the human intelligence (or ignorance) industry. You no longer need to be in Iran to read Iranian newspapers. One no longer needs to visit the local public library to locate information on Hong Kong’s energy policy. At the same time, the overwhelming presence of mindless junk available for your viewing pleasure almost surely counteracts the value of worthwhile content made available to you. Information, or data in its simplest form, transcends every front porch, and finds its way into countless homes throughout the world. This is the purpose of media, as well as the source of its impotency.

While a plethora of information has been made available to us, a great deal has not—the information that is made available is can often be inaccurately stated, recounted, or expressed. Further, on occasion information is fire-walled, security clearance protected, or just plain obscured—the internet, and therefore media in general, remains bound to realms designated to it by national legislation and the relative expression of power. As we all know “knowledge is power”, and we also know that knowing, allows for the manipulation of people, circumstances, even the future. Still, not knowing, or ignorance, produces the same psychological stagnation that I see plaguing America this election year.

Here are some examples of prioritized news stories, at the expense of potentially more interesting, if not more pertinent stories: Barak Obama’s ties to William Ayers and Weather Underground; John McCain’s eight homes, and his wife’s Budweiser fortune; Sarah Palin’s un- ethical gubernatorial behavior, or Troopergate; Obama’s familial ties to Africa and Islam; McCain’s actual experience as a prisoner of war in Vietnam; Palin’s beliefs as a conservative Christian and her choice of bathroom reading material—all of the above mentioned talking points began simply as information and none of it lends any understanding as how these men and women will address issues of importance, like gang violence in South Central, Los Angeles, or nuclear disarmament talks with North Korea.

Media technology and the idea of “news”, in and of itself, have melded into some amorphous entity—having neither a purpose nor an end but to spew out the entirety of available information. Thus we witness the creation of a rhetorical hurricane that lays waste to all subjects of discussion that are not equipped to sustain the highly fickle gale force winds—any topic that fails to maintain a steady flow of hits, viewers or ratings gets lost in the mix.

The lines of communication that ideally are present between a presidential candidate and the populace have been clogged with a plethora of useless, irrelevant sound bytes, bits and pieces of pseudo knowledge--that in most cases can be neither confirmed, nor will be substantiated by those involved. Can one expect John McCain to speak candidly about his experience in Vietnam, or for Barack Obama to discuss his relationship with his family abroad? Not unless you know them personally, and even then, I doubt one can ever really be confident in getting information that hasn’t been rehearsed or colored to present and protect an image.

I never thought I’d see the day when political candidates were written into late-night comedy specials. While I chuckled at Tina Fey’s impersonation of Sarah Palin, I was in awe of the audacity of SNL writers to add to the already turgid stream of media chatter surrounding this election year. Candidates for federal government elections have learned that television can aid them in producing a favorable image—creating a persona that can be admired, followed, and even made tangible by the inevitable connection that takes place when one interfaces with media technology. Likewise, one’s image can be dirtied, exposed, and criticized via the same brutish means; however, when a candidate’s mettle is measured according to his or her ability to sustain the barrage of media pressure, in addition to his or her ideals, aspirations, and charisma, I think we’ve encountered a variety of interaction with our government officials that lacks the integrity it deserves.

The minds of Americans are so in tune with the talking black box that we have become consumed by the pigeon-holed viewpoints so voraciously streaming through our speakers. Each talking point, every news clip becomes a mental post-it note that through some mental process; we adhere to the image of the subjects being discussed—but the talking points that fail to weather the media storm are forgotten.

Can anyone explain to me how September 11th went from an independent event in America, to a discourse on the need to secure the Iraqi's freedom, on to regime change and an illegal ousting of Saddam Hussein, with a multi-trillion dollar bill being stuffed into my pocket, and then phased out of discussion as if it was no longer important—accomplished primarily with the advent of mainstream media? Whether or not the events that followed September 11th were justified is irrelevant—the fact that a message could rouse the American people towards a very costly war, without the presence of proof, a proper investigation, or a legitimate debate is astounding.

I say all that to insinuate the fundamentally necessary filtering process that must take place, as we look for answers and grope for worthwhile information amongst the ever-flowing debris that comprises modern news media. There are tons of information and data which can be distilled and dispersed around the world in the blink of an eye. So, how can one choose a candidate, who’s digitized image flits and flutters at the never-ending volley of criticism, lies, opinion, and the intermittent truth?

Vote for the candidate that acknowledges your struggle, as well as the uncertainty that surrounds his or her endeavor to ease the travails of your existence. No man is entirely fit to grasp the reigns of this nation, and no campaign catch-phrase is catchy enough to convince me that he is. I don’t expect my leaders to be shining knights of truth and justice, but I demand that they strive to be so. At the end of this election, the most one can hope to realize is the humanity and imperfection of every breathing person campaiging to convince you otherwise.

On the other hand, within this imperfection, the potential remains for one to also find the seed of purpose and ambition—the manifestation of a will to be more, to transcend one’s faults, past, and obstacles. The media fails to communicate that miniscule but profound truth to us, despite its attempts at keeping us "well-informed". This vital characteristic is something that we each have to discern on our own. It is our right and our responsibility as free men and women.

So remember, as media storms pound your mind with its chunky soupy mess of information, keep your head low, your thoughts close to your heart, and never, under any circumstances, believe the hype.