|
||||||||
|
« The bias gets even more blatant |
Blog Home Page
| Kyle-Anne Shiver, Bob Weir on the air »
July 21, 2008 What the Old News Media Risks From Its BiasSomewhere during this campaign the old news media reached the tipping point and their bias meter slid into the red zone. Have their owners considered the possible unintended consequences of this?
Somewhere, perhaps with the now famous Saturday Night Live skit that lampooned the softball questions asked of Senator Obama during the primary debates, the old news media was outed as unequivocally favoring Obama. Since then, their bias has become even more prevalent and obvious. Today, they make no attempt to hide it, and the public is noticing. On Monday, July 21, 2008, Rasmussen Reports stated that,
Americans are not stupid, and most believe in fairness. We’re watching this bias unfold, and we won’t forget it. Here’s just one example of what bias looks like. The July 21 cover of USA Today features an above-the-fold, color photo of Senator Obama with Afghan President Karzai. Page 2 features three black & white photos. One of Senator McCain and Rudy Giuliani at a baseball game. Beneath that photo but above-the-fold is a photo of Obama greeting U.S. troops in Afghanistan. Then, below that Obama photo is yet another one of Obama with Senators Chuck Hagel and Jack Reid, along with Gen. James Lovelace in Kuwait last Friday. In the first two pages of the paper - three Obama photos and one of McCain. About the only way McCain will be able to match Obama’s media coverage is if he robs a convenience store, gets caught, and does a public perp walk. Meanwhile, Drudge reports that, after printing an op-ed piece that Obama submitted, the New York Times editors threw one submitted by McCain back at him saying that it needed to “mirror” Obama’s. (And all this time many of us were thinking elections should be competitive events.) You know that the bias has become undeniable when an Associated Press television reporter writes a piece entitled “Is media playing fair in campaign coverage.” Now there’s a rhetorical question! So what’s the risk to the old news media? What are the long-term unintended consequences from its obvious bias? If Obama is elected, those news outlets most openly biased toward his candidacy will inherit partial responsibility for his performance as POTUS. Their ad revenues and Nielsen ratings could initially bump-up after January. But, if things turn ugly for an Obama administration due to circumstances within or outside their control, the old news media will be looking for someplace to hide. And there will be no such place, because Americans have memories. Update: Cliff Thier notes this just published by AP: "McCain's Peers Click With The Internet: More Senior Citizens Are Using The Web To Keep In Touch With Family And Access Information" Associated Press 3:20 PM |
Recent Articles
Blog Posts
|
|
Comments
"About the only way McCain will be able to match Obama's media coverage is if he robs a convenience store, gets caught, and does a public perp walk."
Or if he announces his running mate.
Posted by: Ken | July 21, 2008 07:01 PM
During the Clinton Dole election NBC always showed Dole in B&W frowning and Clinton in color smiling. This bias is nothing new and will continue.
I disagree, Americans have memories about as long as the last idol episode. How else can you explain Obama or the continued reign of corrupt politicians like Pelosi and Ried?
Posted by: DaveT | July 21, 2008 07:14 PM
One consequence of the overwhelming bias of the Main Stream Media is that I will not support them with my subscription dollars. I gave up on our newspaper full of NYT and AP articles and am letting the magazine supscriptions run out. There are bright spots. Have you checked WIRED. It is so off the wall that they let the truth slip out.
This gives me the freedom to support Michael Yon, Bill Roggio and other independent journalists. Looking at it this way, why give the New York Times $100 plus a year to inject poisonous biased information into my decision making. Just say NO.
Posted by: Rob | July 21, 2008 08:28 PM
The bias of the media is nothing new. During Bush I, I was at a party and an older lady told me her husband worked with the current prez when he was at the UN. "Nice guy but not too bright." I retorted that he was Phi Beta Kappa in 2.5 yrs at Yale. She in a nice way said I was lying.
The media is in the hands of the left. Conservatives have much of talk radio and the centrist station FOX. Liberals haveNPR and all the rest of TV and the NYTimes. It is a travesty.
Republicans should make a concerted effort to get more media in their hands. After all freedom of speech does not mean "fair." It simply means free. "Congress shall make no law...."
Posted by: lee tabin | July 21, 2008 09:53 PM
The bias of the media is nothing new. During Bush I, I was at a party and an older lady told me her husband worked with the current prez when he was at the UN. "Nice guy but not too bright." I retorted that he was Phi Beta Kappa in 2.5 yrs at Yale. She in a nice way said I was lying.
The media is in the hands of the left. Conservatives have much of talk radio and the centrist station FOX. Liberals haveNPR and all the rest of TV and the NYTimes. It is a travesty.
Republicans should make a concerted effort to get more media in their hands. After all freedom of speech does not mean "fair." It simply means free. "Congress shall make no law...."
Posted by: lee tabin | July 21, 2008 09:53 PM
The bias of the media is nothing new. During Bush I, I was at a party and an older lady told me her husband worked with the current prez when he was at the UN. "Nice guy but not too bright." I retorted that he was Phi Beta Kappa in 2.5 yrs at Yale. She in a nice way said I was lying.
The media is in the hands of the left. Conservatives have much of talk radio and the centrist station FOX. Liberals haveNPR and all the rest of TV and the NYTimes. It is a travesty.
Republicans should make a concerted effort to get more media in their hands. After all freedom of speech does not mean "fair." It simply means free. "Congress shall make no law...."
Posted by: lee tabin | July 21, 2008 09:53 PM
With all due respect, you are engaging in wishful thinking. Whenever you are left holding the 'When-It-Gets-Bad-That'll-Show-Em' bag, it's time to regroup one's thoughts.
First, if things get bad, don't worry - there will always be the sacrificial Republican.
Second, if things do indeed get bad, do you think the scribes will let us in on it? To wit:
We had the best economy ever and we believe it's a recession;
We wiped away Al-Q in the mideast, been free from attacks and that is prima-facie evidence that we're less safe today than on 9-11;
Bush has one of the most energy efficient houses on the planet, yet it's the Algore whose praised by turning of the porch light;
Those who can't read a thermometer because they can't count past their fingers are dead-sure of global warming;
McCain was never a war hero, and/or was incompetent to get shot down;
Yellowcake? What yellowcake? Oh, that yellowcake. Still no WMD's in Iraq;
Obama never sat in a church for 20 years.
Still think we won't forget those that fed us the bull bias?
Posted by: George S | July 21, 2008 10:30 PM
Sounds to me as if the NYT...the DNC's Pravda...is already road testing Nanski Pelosovich's 'Fairness Doctrine'...independent of the Politburo's wishes (or in accordance with them.) Mirror Lord Obama's phony crap? I thought he might have abused his semicolons or dangled a participle or maybe spelled 'soshellist doofus' wrong.
The mean wittle weenie trolls on the left can stoop so low they can walk erect under a closed garage door. They are pathologically dishonest, pseudo-intellectual, cringing cowards. How's that for a fair mirroring you vile, despicable SOB's?
Do try the Times sometime...its so soft and gentle on your bottom!
Posted by: Ranger Joe | July 21, 2008 10:49 PM
Sounds to me as if the NYT...the DNC's Pravda...is already road testing Nanski Pelosovich's 'Fairness Doctrine'...independent of the Politburo's wishes (or in accordance with them.) Mirror Lord Obama's phony crap? I thought he might have abused his semicolons or dangled a participle or maybe spelled 'soshellist doofus' wrong.
The mean wittle weenie trolls on the left can stoop so low they can walk erect under a closed garage door. They are pathologically dishonest, pseudo-intellectual, cringing cowards. How's that for a fair mirroring you vile, despicable SOB's?
Do try the Times sometime...its so soft and gentle on your bottom!
Posted by: Ranger Joe | July 21, 2008 10:49 PM
Print journalism is in retreat on revenues, and therefore on staffing and quality control. The Iraq war has shown us what milblogs can do. The blogosphere has to pick up the slack. Can we get an Associated Bloggers institution to counter a shrinking A.P., with a series of bureaus world wide to report what's happening with precision, speed and thoroughness? The brave new world continues.
Posted by: Tax Sage | July 21, 2008 10:50 PM
The American electorate does not want an inherited king to rule - especially one with no quantifiable qualifications. The MSM does - they are still looking for Camelot. Trusting al Milaki will be the Achilles Heel for Obama. As soon as our troops are partially pulled out al Sadr will begin to move in and the half trained Iraqi army is without air cover. Iran is and will continue to be the instigation of terror in the Middle East. They are doing their best to draw us into a war and if we don't comply, they will do it through an attack on Israel. Afghanistan is a poor choice for a battlefield. The only way to win in Afghanistan is to attack through Pakistan and that has its dangers as well. Seems the world commitment to the U.S. after 9/11 was never much more than talk.
Posted by: FRS | July 21, 2008 11:21 PM
The american public is not paying much attention to this race as of yet, so the media can get away with a lot of fawning. They'll go overboard as always and need to attack Barry a little before it's all over.
Posted by: Stephen O'Keeffe | July 22, 2008 12:52 AM
The sad part is that there are a lot of unintelligent, uninformed people out there who only read headlines and will be duped by the media bias.
I must admit that the liberals in this country have got their hate, propaganda and lies finely tuned and working very well this time.
Posted by: Richard | July 22, 2008 01:33 AM
The unintended consequences are already seen in the millions of muted television sets while people surf the web for FACTS.
Posted by: SteveH | July 22, 2008 07:08 AM
McCain should spend the week making his new found belief that America needs to drill, build nuclear and conserve.
Highlight the "Dog that didn't bark" during Katrina/Rita.(not a drop of oil spilled).
Take a trip to Hollywood High to show that there is an oil derrick on the schools property pumping away.....
with their children playing just feet away from evil oil....
illustrating the hypocrisy of the HW lefties.
Grande finale a trip to the northern gravel bank known as ANWR. Force the media to show exactly what the place looks like......
Save the V.P. thing for later........
Posted by: Otis A. Glazebrook, IV | July 22, 2008 07:28 AM
"No one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people." - H.L. Menken
Posted by: CallMeIshmael | July 22, 2008 07:40 AM
WRONG! WRONG! WRONG! The media will say that Obama did not know how serious the situation was....Bush cooked the books!
Posted by: billb | July 22, 2008 08:10 AM
Mr. Cary, you could not possibly be more wrong. Whatever failings Obamassiah has will be the fault of Bush/The Republicans. Everything else he does will be a huge, groundbreaking success.
Have you so quickly forgotten Slick Willy and the way the public ate up the bilge put out by the media?
H. L. Mencken was exactly right. The American public are a bunch of mindless idiots that can be fed whatever the media chooses to feed them.
We Conservatives get on these blogs (all ten of us) and preach to the choir.
Posted by: Keith Kunzler | July 22, 2008 10:20 AM
Take last evening's 'World News Tonight' broadcast. Please!
Charlie Gibson had just wrapped-up the overblown lead-story coverage of Obama's day in Afghanistan (where he said nothing of substance), and the mandatory but pathetic by comparison notice of McCain's day (where he said something quite provocative), when he, Gibson, turned to George Stephanopolous in the studio and in effect said: Gee, George, it must be terribly frustrating for McCain that he can't seem to get decent press coverage.
HELLO!! Earth to Gibson: If the mainstream media would do its job of objectively and fairly covering the two campaigns, then there wouldn't even be a question of decent coverage for McCain. Lacking in news judgment, Gibson and company also aren't too astute at picking-up on unintentional self-parody.
Gibson, Williams, Couric -- just three organ-grinder monkeys, dancing to the music, and then moving about the crowd collecting tips which are then offered to the organ-grinder himself.
Posted by: Chuck Vail | July 22, 2008 10:30 AM
The MSM are too arrogant to take constructive criticism. The SNL skit was a warning shot. When the constructive and not so constructive criticism gives way to humor, the MSM become laughing stocks, and their decline will accelerate. I can see a story about people fainting at an Obama event, and that was only counting MSM reporters and anchors.
Posted by: B'ham | July 22, 2008 10:57 AM
It seems to me that the left is DESPERATE to see O'bummer elected president. The frantic efforts of the MSM to ensure his coronation prior to the election reveals their fear of his lack of qualifications. They feel they MUST sanctify him before the public so that any actual effort to evaluate his suitability for the job will look petty and crass. St O'brother couldn't articulate a plan to buy groceries, but the MSM is going to declare anyone who tries to reveal his weaknesses to be unfair. Don't forget the MSM treatment of their erstwhile darling Hillary! How much more will they villify McCain?
Many people lament the lack of forceful articulation by McCain of his principles and policies. I think the outcome will be the same whether he does or doesn't say something substantive. The MSM will take something out of context to characterize the whole speach as either stupid (like they did Busch) or mean (like they did Gingrich), then they'll immediately change to subject back to their adoration of O'blather!
Posted by: bubblehead | July 22, 2008 11:48 AM