POLI: The Mainstream Media Has Picked Your Candidates, Based on Advertising Budgets

Wow, those B@$T3RDZ!... thats nothing short of a behind the scenes look at what really happens in the game of politics... very unfortunate ron paul didn't get the media hype that mccain did, quite frankly I never heard of the guy myself... the media shapes what you want to hear, and thats proven right there...

Originally posted by mister.old.school
Here we see a stunning manipulation of cultural meme/zeitgeist by mainstream media -- the burying of Ron Paul. We who follow events of conspiratorial nature know well the unprecedented cultural popularity of Ron Paul going into December of 2008. This graph shows a stunning cultural awareness of Mr. Paul through an amazing amount of online searches, contrasted by an equally stunning lack of news coverage.

Amazing how nicely you have presented all of this. My compliments!

I am actually a bit shocked.

But I also guess that people who look for 'Paris Hilton' are people at ages that don't matter when there is a election. Or are 'adults' also looking for 'Paris Hilton'? If this is so, I think that is a problem that deserves more attention than any other!

You also state at the end of your post:

News coverage of the candidates had nothing to do with who had the more aggressive platform, security strategy, or economic plan, and everything to do with who is able to commit to more advertising.

But isn't that just marketing? Give your success product/best paying client the best coverage and so? If the 'conspiracy' reveals only this I am less shocked, which is strange because it is just as scary as to think that 'the mainstream media' is controled and manipulated by few.

Either case...The conclusion must indeed be that the 'mainstream media' is shaping 'our' world wether we like/know it or not...

Just a reminder, the fact that MSM is implicated is important. However, our anonymous friend suggested that the word comes from 'as high as it gets'.

Which supports corporate influence (and possible control) of our political and government reality.

This thread heavily suggests that dollar signs trump societal values and mores...an interesting thought to say the least.

This truth is about as hard as it could get... could it? Very clear cut and damning.

More internet buzz/interest about Ron Paul, less for Paris Hilton,
Number of times I've heard about Ron Paul in the newspapers: 2.
Number of times I've heard about Paris Hilton in the newspapers: 300-400+

Amazing, simply amazing

Thank you for this, your post must reach far and wide so everyone knows just who controls their destinies for evil purposes.

[edit on 27-8-2008 by star in a jar]

wow. I always knew Ron Paul was bieng buried but there wasnt good evidence and everyone against Ron always downplay him or say he's crazy parroting the MSM. From now on i'm referencing this data in every argument about this I ever get into in the future. Thanks Oldschool

The reporters are supposed to be reporting the news that happens not making the news they want to feed to the masses for their own reasons.

Just like the president is supposed to be the leader of our country and the elected chosen man of the people but instead he just served corperate and foreign interests and lets his own citizens rot in a new orleans stew of death for days and lets osama binladen out of the country after 9/11 and lets all his pals have billions and billions of dollars of taxpayer money to burn like crazy while playing mercenary in Iraq. bloody hell. I hate this country sometimes.

Just like the cops who are supposed to serve and protect you are gonna kick in your door and tase you and drag you off to a concentration camp if your a dissident, Protester, or just a muslim who calls the old country once in a while to talk to his family.

Just like the courts of law that are supposed to get you justice lock away millions of nonviolent drug offenders and innocent men who are later exoneratted with DNA evidence and the books of law are so vast that no layperson could ever understand them, so theres no way to know whether you are breaking a law and ignorance is no excuse to these people.


well I'm still gonna vote for Ron Paul. Anyone who tells me my vote is wasted is getting a punch in the face and Im gonna be saying I TOLD YOU SO when we get more of the same garbage from this deeply currupted system. I assure you McCain will win. Bush will sit to his left with his hand up McCains butt working the puppet controls to make him say what Bushy wants him to. Or what the corperations want him to. Or what the media wants him to. just a puppet. I'm gonna learn japanese and move to Japan. I hate this garbage.

I don't want to rain on the parade, but I am a doubter. You will need to prove the assertions with some testing, before I buy this wholesale.

I can easily make the assertion that both the media and the public dropped interest in Ron Paul, once he had been excluded from participation. This is reasonable, since it is what we all apparently witnessed.

I give some credability to your claims, and surely he was shoved out of the picture. You say the media did it. I think the party did it, and the media backed them up.

You need to demonstrate where pumping the interest pumps the coverage, and withdrawing the interest, drops the coverage.

Then you need to test the limits. Drop something the media supports. Push something the media resists, and sustain the push past where the media notices and counters the trend. If you can break that barrier, then the next Ron Paul can succeed where the last failed.

Knowledge without application is an exercise in futility. I would love to truly be able to participate in a cultural revolution. Wouldn't you?

Is anyone else willing to back Oldschool and test his hypothesis. I would like to call for a showing of support for actively helping Oldschool test the hypothesis and develop methodology for countering the media manipulation.


[edit on 27-8-2008 by Cyberbian]

I never once believed that we had any real choice in this matter. I know this is cliche, and I know that there are polls taken, but... I have never been polled. So when they keep telling us who is leading and all that, how do I know it is not all BS just to sway more people to go along with what is supposedly 'popular' oppinion.

Hits on a topic don't translate to support for the subject of those hits. Example?

I operate a web site on weapons of mass destruction, have done so since 1999. After September 11th, 2001 and even more so after the anthrax attacks which followed it, my hits jumped from a few dozen a month to thousands a month, dropping gradually to my current level of a few dozen a day.

But how many people LIKE weapons of mass destruction?

You don't have to equate Ron Paul and WMD to see my point.

Jason Lee Miller of WebProNews tried to make a similar point by comparing the number of hits on the McCain and Obama campaign Web sites. I gave him a similar answer to the one I presented here - buzz ABOUT a candidate doesn't necessarily translate to support FOR a candidate.

I'd never heard Ron Paul's name or read it in print prior to his candidacy to be President. I'm probably one of the people who Google counted as having searched him, but I wasn't a supporter of his before researching his name on the Web wasn't one after I was finished researching him and am not one now. The same goes for the other candidate who is generally conceded as having the edge in Internet buzz, Barack Obama.

The people trying to equate Internet hits with popularity have forgotten that for every liberal net root there are a few thousand people who are intimately familiar with the Internet who don't agree with that net root's politics, and are networked with each other over the Internet and other means of communications.

Just saying to BOTH campaigns - don't count your chickens by using Internet metrics.