Why cover Obama's hamburger lunch? People like it.
Every time there's a human interest story about the president or the first lady, there's always criticism from "serious journalists" and "serious citizens" who can't understand why a news outlet would devote air time or pixel space to something they consider meaningless.Skip to next paragraph
As Iowa's Kent Sorenson jumps to Ron Paul ship, rat analogies abound
Could Romney 'train' be derailed by Gingrich? Perry? Someone new?
Virginia primary: Was it so hard for Perry and Gingrich to get on the ballot?
Donald Trump as third-party candidate: Will he woo Americans Elect?
Ron Paul: why racist newsletter flap could hurt him in Iowa
Subscribe Today to the Monitor
Take yesterday's hamburger run by President Obama and Vice President Biden. It got a lot of attention. As NBC's Sara K. Smith writes, "This event was so exciting and significant that every major media outlet covered it."
Some of our readers (who curiously clicked to read the story) said it was not newsworthy:
Cogito wrote, "This is news??? Good, grief…"
Nani offered, "Wow…a free lunch for biased press coverage."
But most enjoyed the article.
Smith sarcastically said the hamburger run was the "most important event in human history since the invention of fire." And she wondered why such events are covered.
And it's not just this president. People were just as interested in the personal side of President George W. Bush. Just as interested.
For example, whenever a non-newsmaker appeared on "Ask the White House" (the online chat on the White House web site) traffic increased.
When the White House curator discussed ghosts in the White House, traffic spiked. Or when the chef answered questions about food, traffic soared. Whenever Barney the dog was discussed, record traffic was recorded.