Media is Giving the Election to Obama Through Bias Reporting
July 8th 2008 23:54
It was the perfect photo op in Unity, New Hampshire when Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton called for a united front, but is it really Pleasantville or a show?
The 18 million voters that selected Hillary Clinton are not moving too quickly to join the Obama bandwagon even if the media says it is. The reasons for my doubts is that it has been a clearly biased media campaign from the start. Obama has gotten the red carpet treatment like none I have ever seen. It makes me wonder what the heck is going on.
If you look at CNN right now in the political section you will find no less than 8 articles on Obama, while Bob Barr has none, and McCain has about 4.
CBS was worse, I stopped counting after 15 articles, blogs, and columns on one page.
Fox News had at least 6
This was the same way during the Primary season. Hillary Clinton could not get a break because the media was falling all over their self with the sweet nothings for Obama. One could argue that the media won the Primary for Obama. I mean every marketer knows that people swear they don't believe the media, but they follow what it says. If the media said the polls were for Obama then people believed that and didn't want to "waste" a vote, so they went with him too.
If the media accused Bill Clinton of being racist in his remarks, no matter how out of context, the people believed it.
When the media was having a fake field day over Rev. Wright, Obama's criminal friends, and the like; no one noticed that Obama was calling the shots. He <u><i><b>gave</b></i></u> the race speech, but did not take questions. He hid himself from the media for over 10 days and shut his wife up. It worked, because the media decided that this law school graduate was a victim instead of a participant of the Church he sat in for 20 years.
When he made his bitter comments and then insulted people with his "clarifying," again the media just let him lead.
The question is, what is it about Obama that makes hardened news journalist fall all over themself being nice with their coverage?
1. I think it was the subtle message that if you don't support Obama you have to be a racist. It did not leave room for the person who does not think he is qualified.
2. He is articulant. Apparently some may have been taken aback that a man of color could talk to the level of his education.
3. The media needed a hero. Ratings fly through the roof whenever he sits down and opens his mouth, even if it is a flip-flop.
So it would seem that bloggers are going to be the ones that tell the whole story and not the biased media. They have started a cycle and arrogance will prevent them from going back on it.
The 18 million voters that selected Hillary Clinton are not moving too quickly to join the Obama bandwagon even if the media says it is. The reasons for my doubts is that it has been a clearly biased media campaign from the start. Obama has gotten the red carpet treatment like none I have ever seen. It makes me wonder what the heck is going on.
If you look at CNN right now in the political section you will find no less than 8 articles on Obama, while Bob Barr has none, and McCain has about 4.
Fox News had at least 6
This was the same way during the Primary season. Hillary Clinton could not get a break because the media was falling all over their self with the sweet nothings for Obama. One could argue that the media won the Primary for Obama. I mean every marketer knows that people swear they don't believe the media, but they follow what it says. If the media said the polls were for Obama then people believed that and didn't want to "waste" a vote, so they went with him too.
If the media accused Bill Clinton of being racist in his remarks, no matter how out of context, the people believed it.
When the media was having a fake field day over Rev. Wright, Obama's criminal friends, and the like; no one noticed that Obama was calling the shots. He <u><i><b>gave</b></i></u> the race speech, but did not take questions. He hid himself from the media for over 10 days and shut his wife up. It worked, because the media decided that this law school graduate was a victim instead of a participant of the Church he sat in for 20 years.
When he made his bitter comments and then insulted people with his "clarifying," again the media just let him lead.
The question is, what is it about Obama that makes hardened news journalist fall all over themself being nice with their coverage?
1. I think it was the subtle message that if you don't support Obama you have to be a racist. It did not leave room for the person who does not think he is qualified.
2. He is articulant. Apparently some may have been taken aback that a man of color could talk to the level of his education.
3. The media needed a hero. Ratings fly through the roof whenever he sits down and opens his mouth, even if it is a flip-flop.
So it would seem that bloggers are going to be the ones that tell the whole story and not the biased media. They have started a cycle and arrogance will prevent them from going back on it.
| 58 |
| Vote |
Shared on
Subscribe to this blog
Comment by Summer Minor
Kitten Politics
McCain has been given quite the free pass on many of his comments. I have barely heard any reaction from mainstream media about certain comments McCain has made or have seen them delve into his past the way that Obama has been. The increase in articles referring to him is more because his every word is analyzed back and forth while every person he has every known is run down to question how patriotic he is. Little has been done to look at McCain's questionable past, his flip flopping on certain issues, or even just calling him out when he makes errors in his speeches.
When there is one article about McCain holding a fundraiser to three articles questioning is Obama is too black, a communist, and not going to get any white votes the favor is clearly not swinging towards Obama, despite having more press. Just look at AP Chairman Dean Singleton for example.
You are right that the numbers don't lie, however in this case that's not a good thing.