Political pundits: from civil commentary to shout shows

+ how Iowa caucuses became 'first in the nation' US Edition - Today's top story: Pundits: Central to democracy, or partisan spewers of opinion who destroy trust [View in browser]( US Edition | 4 January 2024 [The Conversation] [The Conversation]( Pundits are everywhere. Progressive, very progressive, moderate, conservative or very conservative – somewhere on cable TV or online, you’ll find the commentary you crave. Sometimes it’s informed, such as when a professional in an industry is brought in to comment on something happening in that industry. Sometimes – much more often, in fact – a pundit is a political hack who spouts a party line. There are a lot of “former administration officials” out there happy to advance their party’s agenda on prime time and get into fights with other pundits while they’re doing it. We’re now in an election year, when every day there’s a party of pundits. Mike McDevitt, a professor of journalism and media studies at the University of Colorado Boulder, [dissects the history of pundits](, ranging from public intellectual Walter Lippmann to the grumpy “Sage of Baltimore,” H.L. Mencken, to the irreverent and perceptive Molly Ivins. And he asks the crucial question for our politics-and-media-soaked modern times: “What kind of commentary is needed now, when so much political talk is degrading and divisive?” McDevitt’s answer, in part: “Pundits support democracy when their combat is driven by ideas rather than tribal identities.” Naomi Schalit Senior Editor, Politics + Democracy Two pundits – Jonah Goldberg, left, and Paul Begala, second from right – discus politics with journalists Kristen Holmes and Jake Tapper. The Conversation [Pundits: Central to democracy, or partisan spewers of opinion who destroy trust]( Mike McDevitt, University of Colorado Boulder Pundits are everywhere, giving their analyses of current events, politics and the state of the world. You’ll hear a lot more from them this election year. Is their rank opinion good for democracy? Guests attend a rally for former U.S. President Donald Trump on Dec. 19, 2023, in Waterloo, Iowa. Scott Olson/Getty Images [How the Iowa caucuses became the first major challenge of US presidential campaigns]( Steffen W. Schmidt, Iowa State University A political scientist traces the development of the first-in-the-nation Iowa caucuses and how the small, rural state became influential in presidential politics. Donald Trump at a campaign event in Waterloo, Iowa, on Dec. 19, 2023. Kamil Krzaczysnki/AFP via Getty Images [Trump barred from Colorado ballot – now what?]( Mark A. Graber, University of Maryland A historian and legal scholar of a key part of the US Constitution explains what happens now that the Colorado Supreme Court has ruled Trump cannot be on the state’s presidential ballots. [Israel’s highest court protects its power to curb government extremism − 3 essential reads]( Naomi Schalit, The Conversation Israel’s highest court has struck down the government’s law limiting its power. Three scholars look at why the law was proposed, what it aimed to do and who supported – and opposed – it. [Why 14th Amendment bars Trump from office: A constitutional law scholar explains principle behind Colorado Supreme Court ruling]( Mark A. Graber, University of Maryland Colorado’s Supreme Court has removed Donald Trump from the state’s 2024 presidential ballot. A scholar of constitutional law explains why. [More city hall news coverage isn’t enough to revive local news outlets]( Erik Peterson, Rice University; Josh McCrain, University of Utah There are lots of ideas about how to save local news. One of them is that increasing coverage of local politics will bring back readers and viewers. Research shows that it doesn’t. [How religion and politics will mix in 2024 – three trends to track]( Tobin Miller Shearer, University of Montana The 2024 elections may see a more intense end-times rhetoric, claims of divine support and a failure to condemn the rise in Christian nationalism, writes a religion scholar. - [School board members could soon be blocked from blocking people − and deleting their comments − on social media]( Charles J. Russo, University of Dayton A law scholar examines a pair of Supreme Court cases that pit the public’s free speech rights against politicians’ rights. Like this newsletter? You might be interested in our other weekly emails: [Science Editors' Picks]( • [This Week in Religion]( • [Weekly Highlights]( [The Conversation]( You’re receiving this newsletter from [The Conversation]( 303 Wyman Street, Suite 300 Waltham, MA 02451 [Forward to a friend]( • [Unsubscribe](