Belief is growing that the media is trying to help Obama win.

The press, outside of Fox, has long leaned towards Dems on pretty much every issue. It's really not good for people to expect straight news from them.
reply to post by Johnmike

Wow, check this out. This is from John McCain's website. If you click on the link you can watch a video with two different background songs and vote for the one you think is the best.



www.johnmccain.com...

Here is the first video.



I think this is hilarious, not only for the videos, but because of the desperation and media envy.

That is freaking hilarious! Thank you so much!

That's on McCain's website? What's he trying to do?

(By the way, I feel that thrill )

reply to post by Hal9000


So what about the media pundits comments in the video? Didn't you find them slightly odd the way they fawned over Obama? Didn't seem too objective to me.

reply to post by pavil

I find their comments just as hilarious. Objective? No, absolutely not. Are you asking me if I agree that some in the media are in love with Obama? Sure, but does that mean we shouldn't vote for him? Does that mean he will be a lousy president? Does that mean McCain will be a better president? Again, my answer is no, no and hell no.

reply to post by Hal9000


Everyone just needs to remember all of this for the next time Democrats starting wringing their hands about something. Democrats always think its ok when they do it. Take of the media and influence an election? Sure, why not! Its democrats, so its ok!

reply to post by DocMoreau


"Media Matters" as a source? Aere you serious? Why not just post Soros' latest memo? No frickin' wonder you don't recognize bias!

reply to post by Dronetek

So if those on the left can influence and election, are you admitting that a right wing channel like Fox can also have influence over it's listeners? People have been saying that for years, and republicans will say it's not true, so it's ok.

We should remember that also.

Originally posted by Dronetek
Everyone just needs to remember all of this for the next time Democrats starting wringing their hands about something.

I just wish you could remember when the shoe was on the other foot and people were bitching and moaning about Bush (JUST like you are bitching and moaning about Obama now) and I wish you could remember how you were light hearted and laughed (JUST like the Obama supporters are now)

Democrats always think its ok when they do it.

That shoe fits both feet, Dronetek! As sickening as Obama supporters are to you, you can rest assured that you were JUST as sickening.

... Or was it OK when you did it?

reply to post by Hal9000



So the premise of this thread is possible. Some in the media who support Obama are doing more than reporting, they have become part of the process when they openly side with one side or person. To say that the media's reporting of an event has no influence on the public's perception would be a gross understatement.

The thing that is bothering me is that normal news shows and mainstream magazines have seemed to become Op-Ed pieces, in this case for Obama. Normal journalistic standards have seem to been thrown out the door. I can understand certain shows and mags having a bias but it seems supposedly news/current event shows have become shills for one side over the other, when they should be objective and neutral.

lol i cannot wait until obama wins.. and a year later... the change is a change of tone and exterior image,not policies....America screwed yet again,then again...in the uk the conservatives will probably win the next election...so we are in the same boat kinda...

Originally posted by pavil
So the premise of this thread is possible. Some in the media who support Obama are doing more than reporting, they have become part of the process when they openly side with one side or person. To say that the media's reporting of an event has no influence on the public's perception would be a gross understatement.

So now all of a sudden it is a gross understatement? I don't see how you can complain about this all of a sudden, when this has been going on for years. Is it just because it is about Obama?

Also, I think we need to separate two different kinds of biasing because I think you are lumping everything into one yes or no question. The premise of the thread is that the media is giving more air time to Obama, and the other is that some reporters are giving favorable opinions on Obama. So to be more accurate let's deal with each one individually.

I think Obama is getting more air time simply because he is the one making the headlines by going on his overseas trip. Meanwhile McCain has tried countering the effect by making some exaggerated statements and promises of picking a VP... ect. So from what I've seen on CNN, which is what I watch, they give more time to Obama, but they are not ignoring McCain.

As far as favorable opinions on Obama, I would limit that to only a few reporters like Chris Mathews, whom I have never watched and have only heard that he favors Obama. I see nothing wrong with it as long as there are others on the other side of the fence like Bill O'reilly, who is going to favor McCain.

If you don't like what is happening in the media, then you can't have it one sided. You have to complain about both sides.

The thing that is bothering me is that normal news shows and mainstream magazines have seemed to become Op-Ed pieces, in this case for Obama. Normal journalistic standards have seem to been thrown out the door. I can understand certain shows and mags having a bias but it seems supposedly news/current event shows have become shills for one side over the other, when they should be objective and neutral.

If you are saying that most reporters are being biased for Obama, then I think that is your opinion, because I don't agree with that, and unless you also complain about other reporters on the other side of the fence, then you are not being fair.

reply to post by Dronetek


NO... you're simplistic in thinking us liberals and Democrats feel that way about him... I mean that's so funny that I almost pee myself laughing every time I read those claims.

We know he's just another politican... we are just excited about the Republican party and movement conservatisms pending loss of atomic union.



[edit on 24-7-2008 by grover]

reply to post by pavil


I know you're not addressing me but I have an opinion about this. (Big surprise)

You're right. This has been slowly developing for years. When I was a kid, the news was truly impartial. But that's been many, many years ago. It's been slowly moving from news to entertainment. Whatever sells. The sensational. This is the way it is.

People want to be stimulated. Excited. We have absolutely everything we want at our fingertips (by design) and we're bored. The television corporations know this. They are masters at manipulation. They know they need to do more than tell us what's going on or we'll get bored and turn the channel. They need to reach out and grab us. They are advertising agencies.

Given that that's the way it is, it is our responsibility (I believe) to realize that what we hear is NOT the Truth. It's a jazzed up, sensationalized version of slanted and spun entertainment that resembles something that might have some truth in it.

If John McCain represented "change" from what we've been experiencing over the past 7 years, HE would be the media "darling" because that would sell. He doesn't. He represents the SOT (Same old thing). People want something new and shiny and different. So, the media, in the form of "entertainews", gives us what we want to see.

And Obama also gives us what we want. New, shiny and different. He knows that's what he needs to represent (regardless of the truth) to get the nation behind him.

The "news" channels are actually about the same as the reality shows. In that they sell. They're not real, they're staged. Their purpose is to manipulate.

It's our job not to be manipulated.

Can I just say again.... Link TV is the only real news channel left that I know of.

As an aside. I didn't decide to vote for Obama based on the news. Anyone who bases their vote on the representation of these people on the "news" is making a HUGE mistake! I wasn't even watching the news when I decided for whom to vote. The reasons I decided to vote for Obama was because of what I read on the various sources on the Internet. Pro and Con. I researched and researched. I read Michelle's thesis. I studied Barack's State Senate history, his voting record, his biography. THEN I started watching the networks to see their take and I was delighted to see that MSNBC was the Obama show! I already liked him, now I could watch his reality programming. And I still check in with FOX, too. Just yesterday, I watched a show on FOX.

News is no longer news. IT'S UP TO US.

reply to post by Gatordone

Apparently you are unfamiliar with irony. The irony that a man has a book written about the media's love affair with him crying that the media is not giving him the attention that they are currently affording his rival. So the last 8 years since McCain failed in 2000, all the media attention that kept him relevant to voters, didn't happen?

No. Not Media Matters as a 'source'...
Free Ride: John McCain and the Media is the source I am directing people to...
but then I was only making fun of McCain's crybaby stance right now. You are right, Media Matters is the publisher I believe, and are selling the book. So maybe I am a crazy liberal now.... right? Better call Sean Hannity or Lars Larson up on the phone, and tell them what a liberal I am.

Too bad you get facts from talking heads...

And to rebut you and Bill O'Reilly's claim:
en.wikipedia.org...

According to Bill O'Reilly and others, George Soros is funding Media Matters through Democracy Alliance -- an organization of progressive donors.[18][19] The Democracy Alliance does not collect and distribute money on behalf of its members. Alliance members donate directly to the organizations of their choice.[20] Media Matters has stated publicly on numerous occasions that Soros has never given money to the organization either directly or through another organization

It doesn't matter anyway. The McCaininites and McCainiacs will do whatever they can to craft their own reality.

What is newsworthy about John McCain right now? His VP Choice, his flubs on the surge, and his failure to make it an appearance on an oil rig. Go ahead, look it up.

Then we have Obama, who has travelled to Afghanistan, Iraq, Jordan, Israel, Palestine and then on to Europe. Meeting with the leaders in each country.

Now tell me, in all sincerity, that you don't think it is a bit childish to cry about lack of media attention while your political rival is on a world tour, and you are sitting at home?

I highly doubt the Obama campaign would act that way.

I guess it is only someone who has tasted the sweet, sweet love of the media, would lament over the lose of that love.

That must be why the McCain campaign is making a mountain out of a molehill.
DocMoreau

Originally posted by Hal9000
reply to post by Dronetek

 

So if those on the left can influence and election, are you admitting that a right wing channel like Fox can also have influence over it's listeners? People have been saying that for years, and republicans will say it's not true, so it's ok.

We should remember that also.

its one network, amongst a sea of liberal networks. You've GOT to be kidding me?

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic


Given that that's the way it is, it is our responsibility (I believe) to realize that what we hear is NOT the Truth. It's a jazzed up, sensationalized version of slanted and spun entertainment that resembles something that might have some truth in it.

I couldn't agree more with that statement. The problem is for many in the public, they don't investigate further. The News is the "truth". I mean how many in the public have ever watched a full speech on C-SPAN?

Originally posted by Hal9000

As far as favorable opinions on Obama, I would limit that to only a few reporters like Chris Mathews, whom I have never watched and have only heard that he favors Obama. I see nothing wrong with it as long as there are others on the other side of the fence like Bill O'reilly, who is going to favor McCain.

But Matthews show is Hardball, where he asks the candidates the "hard questions" Do you think he will really do that to someone who is sent to "deliver" us and gives Chris a tingly feeling up his leg? It would be different if they were giving equal time, certain shows have just morphed into half hour or hour long infocommericals on why one candidate is better than the other.

If you don't like what is happening in the media, then you can't have it one sided. You have to complain about both sides.

I agree. Hopefully you will complain about BOTH sides as well.

[edit on 24-7-2008 by pavil]

reply to post by Dronetek


What is going on now? Instead of the McCain being upset that he is being upstaged in the media by Obama, the Media is covering the fact that McCain is upset. What a great way to make news.

newsblogs.chicagotribune.com...

McCain thought it was important for Obama to see the war firsthand. Now the media is treating the trip as important, and McCain acts as though they shouldn't.

The Arizona senator may be especially resentful because, in past campaigns, he was seen as the media darling--and even jokingly referred to reporters as "my base." But given that experience, he should know that if the press is treating Obama favorably now, it won't last.

The 'news' of McCain's unhappiness about all the attention Obama is getting has even reached India.
www.hindu.com...

Washington: The Republican presidential hopeful, John McCain, let his frustration with the U.S. media boil over on Tuesday for its coverage of Senator Barack Obama’s visit to West Asia and Europe.

Mr. McCain, upset over the extent to which his campaign has been eclipsed, launched a video on the Internet entitled Obama Love, with quotes from TV anchors and journalists that he regards as evidence of bias. It came the day after Mr. McCain protested over what he saw as another sign of bias, a rejection of a comment article on Iraq he submitted to the New York Times.

It is a turnaround for Mr. McCain, who established a reputation for open relations with the press during his unsuccessful run for the Republican nomination in 2000 and during this year’s primaries contest. But since Mr. Obama won the Democratic nomination last month, his campaign team has complained repeatedly that the U.S. media is behaving as if the election is a foregone conclusion.

It seems to me that McCain has the media's attention now, but for all the wrong reasons.
DocMoreau

reply to post by Dronetek

The only news channel I would consider liberal is MSNBC, which I don't watch. I usually watch CNN, which each reporter may have a slight bias, but they go both ways. Recently, Lou Dobbs has been really been hard on Obama, for some reason and he is Mr. Independent. I have come to realize that he just doesn't like anyone.

Who else would you consider a liberal station?