Media admits it's Bias toward Obama

[daihashi]

I am so glad to see someone finally admit to what we've been saying this entire time. After they denied it again and again throughout the election. Although it doesn't matter now since Obama will be our next President in January.

Here's an excerpt from the very end of the article

"Numbers aren't everything in political coverage, but readers deserve comparable coverage of the candidates. "

If even a reporter in the media can admit that then why can't the rest of America that has seemingly been blind folded?

Washington Times - Wash Post concedes bias for Obama

daihashi Reviewed by daihashi on 11-12-2008. Media admits it's Bias toward Obama I am so glad to see someone finally admit to what we've been saying this entire time. After they denied it again and again throughout the election. Although it doesn't matter now since Obama will be our next President in January. Here's an excerpt from the very end of the article "Numbers aren't everything in political coverage, but readers deserve comparable coverage of the candidates. " If even a reporter in the media can admit that then why can't the rest of America that has Rating: 5

[maladroit]

the same bias existed for ronald reagan, and bill clinton when they, and even george bush after he declared war on anyone that looked at uncle sam the wrong way...the love affair will wear off if obama starts screwing up...but if obama comes through with the goods, it's going to get even sillier



"George Bush is the President. He makes the decisions. He wants me to line up, just tell me where."
- Dan Rather, in the heady days after 911, before he got bitter about being lied to

[daihashi]

the same bias existed for ronald reagan, and bill clinton when they, and even george bush after he declared war on anyone that looked at uncle sam the wrong way...the love affair will wear off if obama starts screwing up...but if obama comes through with the goods, it's going to get even sillier



"George Bush is the President. He makes the decisions. He wants me to line up, just tell me where."
- Dan Rather, in the heady days after 911, before he got bitter about being lied to

If that's what you want to believe. Whatever makes you sleep better at night. :hippy:

[thcbongman]

Well that's quite obvious about the bias with the WP and Obama, given WP has a liberal-leaning slant to begin with. But this story came from the Washington Times, the conservative newspaper in town which is clearly shows bias for McCain. All and all, canceled out.

[delusionsofNORMALity]

i've been sitting here, watching y'all act as if you were actually making some important decision. you've dutifully gone to the polls and cast your ballots as you've been told. you seem to believe that you've made your choices based on some rational criteria and all i can do is feel sorry for you. at first i honestly didn't think that the american people would elect a black man named barak hussein obama, but he was packaged so well for you that it seems you really had little choice.

his opposition was vilified through "guilt by association" and made to seem the fool by the media you so blindly follow. they played on your greed, they played on your guilt and they played on your frustrations over an unresponsive government that they themselves were in bed with.

i would probably be more proud of you for electing a man of color to the presidency if it was a man worthy of the office or if you had really had a choice at all.

[daihashi]

Well that's quite obvious about the bias with the WP and Obama, given WP has a liberal-leaning slant to begin with. But this story came from the Washington Times, the conservative newspaper in town which is clearly shows bias for McCain. All and all, canceled out.

oops... sorry

Deborah Howell - An Obama Tilt in Campaign Coverage - washingtonpost.com

There you go. I was looking at quite a few news articles, must've copied the wrong one . There it is from the source published by the source.

[maladroit]

"at first i honestly didn't think that the american people would elect a black man named barak hussein obama, but he was packaged so well for you that it seems you really had little choice. his opposition was vilified through "guilt by association" and made to seem the fool by the media you so blindly follow."

- why wouldn't americans vote for barack hussein obama? because he's guilty by association of his middle name to saddam hussein? i bet a more than a few mccain voters blindly followed the fox network on that association

[Dave Byrd]

Lots of newspapers openly admitted the fact that they were for Obama, Daihashi, although you seem to think they did not. The ones who endorsed him editorially--a little over half the nation's big metropolitan dailies--were fairly open about that, and the big news weeklies like Time and Newsweek and USNews talked about it too. You'd probably enjoy reading the Columbia Journalism Review sometime. They have talked a lot about the bias, too, and done several case study examples.

There's no doubt in my mind media coverage was biased in his favor. He was someone anyone who likes to watch politics couldn't not be interested in because A, he was racially diverse. B. He was an talented orator. Their bias got stronger after that race speech he gave. C. He is young, and D., He was so unflappable. Just calm, straight, focused and steady. It was because he was so different from the normal old white-guy politician, I think, in the way he looked and sounded. Made us old white guys look uninteresting in comparison. Anyone who's been watching politics a while has seen a good bit of McCain, so he was not as unique seeming. Notice, though, that Palin got a lot of coverage and attention, too, for her differentness.

Anyone else notice that now that Obama's elected, he's getting more media attention than any new president-elect in history? I'm convinced he is--and I expect his administration will be watched more closely than any since JFK

[delusionsofNORMALity]

why wouldn't americans vote for barack hussein obama? because he's guilty by association of his middle name to saddam hussein?

i must admit, i thought that bigotry and innuendo would win out over guilt and envy. that was quite early in the campaigning and we had yet to see how neatly packaged the messiah was to become.

i bet a more than a few mccain voters blindly followed the fox network on that association.

i think you'll find that any propaganda from the right was more than outweighed by that from the left by sheer volume alone. conservatism was never even represented by the candidates that were finally given up for the vote. this was a choice between the failures of the bush administration, far from a conservative bunch of fools, and the possibility of anything else. of course the anything else won.

[daihashi]

Lots of newspapers openly admitted the fact that they were for Obama, Daihashi, although you seem to think they did not. The ones who endorsed him editorially--a little over half the nation's big metropolitan dailies--were fairly open about that, and the big news weeklies like Time and Newsweek and USNews talked about it too. You'd probably enjoy reading the Columbia Journalism Review sometime. They have talked a lot about the bias, too, and done several case study examples.

There's no doubt in my mind media coverage was biased in his favor. He was someone anyone who likes to watch politics couldn't not be interested in because A, he was racially diverse. B. He was an talented orator. Their bias got stronger after that race speech he gave. C. He is young, and D., He was so unflappable. Just calm, straight, focused and steady. It was because he was so different from the normal old white-guy politician, I think, in the way he looked and sounded. Made us old white guys look uninteresting in comparison. Anyone who's been watching politics a while has seen a good bit of McCain, so he was not as unique seeming. Notice, though, that Palin got a lot of coverage and attention, too, for her differentness.

Anyone else notice that now that Obama's elected, he's getting more media attention than any new president-elect in history? I'm convinced he is--and I expect his administration will be watched more closely than any since JFK

I'm not shocked or astounded or anything. More like I'm offended that the media whom is supposed to be neutral as they are the ones reporting the news, admit to being biased.

When you put your own spin on the truth it is no longer the truth anymore. It becomes your opinion. So instead of getting the news we are getting opinion. Either directly by words in the report itself or indirectly by the author/reporter opting to report or not report on a piece because of their bias.

I'm bothered that everyone else around me seems to be ok with this. I am referring to the media influencing the news that is reported according to their own bias. By the time it gets to our eyes and ears it's no longer the news and we have been stripped of the ability to make our own decision on the matter. That's what irks me.

bleh, but now I'm just ranting.