Who's invisible?

Ignatieff had this to say today about his alleged invisibility  over the past couple of months:

"I'm surprised to see you all -- you disappeared on me this summer."

Comments

[David Akin]

Indeed. And you could make the argument - my little birdy bid [http://davidakin.blogware.com/blog/_archives/2009/8/25/4299735.html] -- that Iggy has been more "out there" than the Prime Minister.

[SteveV]

Susan

Let's say for arguments sake that the Liberal braintrust determined that Ignatieff would have a low profile summer, more focus on the nuts and bolts, than trying to make "news". Why would they have concluded that? Because history tells us that opposition leaders don't make news in the summer, their virtually invisible no matter their efforts. Interestingly, you find reference to this fact in almost article that was critical of Ignatieff this summer, followed by a curious BUT to further something else.

Now, look at the coverage Ignatieff's events received. Absolutely nothing, and I make particular note of a 3 day visit into Bloc heartland, the first for a Liberal leader in recent memory- even that wasn't news. Did the media then not prove the point, and in doing so make their criticism mute? It boiled down to this, a manufactured criticism surrounding events which they would have ignored (and then did) anyways.

A summer of madness really. In reference to what David Akin put up, that came out the day after a high profile columnist told us all that Ignatieff was playing it safe, mostly visiting areas where the Liberals were strong. The laziness is just obnoxious, as evidenced by the "birdy".

As a partisan, it can all be dismissed as simply whining. However, I really think that misses an elemental point that speaks to simple common sense and logic. The only news made was when it appeared he hadn't chose to be ignored, and then when he was out and about, that wasn't news. Nothing was something, but something was invisible. My head hurts.