Washington Post Ran 16 Negative Stories on Bernie Sanders in 16 Hours

[Hissyspit]

http://fair.org/home/washington-post-ran-16-negative-stories-on-bernie-sanders-in-16-hours/



Washington Post Ran 16 Negative Stories on Bernie Sanders in 16 Hours

In what has to be some kind of record, the Washington Post ran 16 negative stories on Bernie Sanders in 16 hours, between roughly 10:20 PM EST Sunday, March 6, to 3:54 PM EST Monday, March 7—a window that includes the crucial Democratic debate in Flint, Michigan, and the next morning’s spin:

All of these posts paint his candidacy in a negative light, mainly by advancing the narrative that he’s a clueless white man incapable of winning over people of color or speaking to women. Even the one article about Sanders beating Trump implies this is somehow a surprise—despite the fact that Sanders consistently out-polls Hillary Clinton against the New York businessman.

- snip -

While the headlines don’t necessarily reflect all the nuances of the text, as I’ve noted before, only 40 percent of the public reads past the headlines, so how a story is labeled is just as important, if not more so, than the substance of the story itself.

- snip -

Despite being ideologically opposed to the Democratic Party (at least in principle), Bezos has enjoyed friendly ties with both the Obama administration and the CIA. As Michael Oman-Reagan notes, Amazon was awarded a $16.5 million contract with the State Department the last year Clinton ran it. Amazon also has over $600 million in contracts with the Central Intelligence Agency, an organization Sanders said he wanted to abolish in 1974, and still says he “had a lot of problems with.” FAIR has previously criticized the Washington Post for failing to disclose, when reporting on tech giant Uber, that Bezos also owns more than $1 billion in Uber stock.

MORE

[riversedge]

1. It is called #vettingBernie

[Hissyspit]

3. No. It's not.

Look at the headlines.

Anyway, I wouldn't be in too much of a hurry to defend the Washington Post, cheerleaders of Bush's Iraq Invasion.

[Broward]

6. The paper shares a past with Hillary re: Iraq.

[Betty Karlson]

11. No, it's called "throwing Clinton any amount of lifelines",

because someone's campaign is sinking and the supposed "knock-out" on Super Tuesday never materialised - and now Someone with an Inevitability Complex is getting desperate, shallow, and kitchen-sink-y.

[Dustlawyer]

20. They are desperate to close Bernie out, he scares the shite out of them!

That's how we know we are on the right track. If they have written him off they wouldn't bother with such a yuuuuge frontal assault on him!

[BreakfastClub]

21. Clinton doesn't need a lifeline, but Bernie sure does. The NRA has campaigned for him at least. nt

[Loudestlib]

34. Hillary Clinton To Raise Money From Ex-NRA Lobbyist

Hillary Clinton’s campaign will hold a fundraiser in Washington on March 21 that will feature as one of its hosts Jeff Forbes, who until the end of last year worked as a lobbyist for the National Rifle Association.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/hillary-clinton-nra-lobbyist_us_56d5e214e4b03260bf784001

[Betty Karlson]

59. No, that was Clinton - heading to a dinner hosted by the NRA people.

You are confusing the two candidates. Don't worry, after all the flip-flopping Clinton has done, it is no surprise that you would accuse Bernie of something Clinton is guilty of.

[Logical]

27. Lol, typical hillary supporter! Nt

[stevenleser]

31. You beat me to it. This is what vetting looks like. nt

[riversedge]

37. ha ha. I do not think I have ever been a step ahead of you.. Have a good day and hope that Hillary

has a wonderful Day

[mhatrw]

90. Vetting? LOL. Look at the headlines! Does any headline mention one scandal

or problem with Sanders' personal life, political record or stances on the important issues facing American citizens?

[ljm2002]

87. No, it is called #LyingForTheOligarchy n/t

[mhatrw]

89. LOL. It's called flinging any shit in sight to see if something, anything will stick.

A new attack headline EVERY single hour?

Somebody call Guinness. This has to be some sort of world's record!

[beedle]

94. If only they vetted the Iraq war and WMDs as much.

Funny how after years and years of pretending repeating 'state propaganda' was 'vetting', they have now redefined 'slander' as 'vetting'.

Have Clinton supports no sense of integrity? The end justifies the means? Is that what the establishment Democratic party is all about?

And it wouldn't be so bad if they did this and actually implemented the progressive polices they pretend to support (during primary season only) but once the primaries are over .. BAMMM ... all right wing all the time.

[Scootaloo]

101. No, it's called "catapulting the propaganda."

[NCTraveler]

2. Looks more like they are trying to help his campaign manager.

His campaign has started going off the rails. Not the worst thing in the world as growth as quick as his is almost impossible to manage.

By the way, the msm treats all democrats like shit. Welcome to the party, put your dancing shoes on. As a democrat they are needed when it comes to media cover.

[Logical]

28. .???? Weird post, what does this even mean? Nt

[NCTraveler]

29. I just read it again. Seems to make perfect logical sense and is pretty basic.

I don't get where your confusion is coming from.

[Matariki]

64. I don't understand your post either

How in the world does an onslaught of negative articles help Sanders' campaign manager?

[NCTraveler]

66. They have clearly started stumbling since SC.

Much of the narrative would help them to get back on solid footing.

[Matariki]

68. Huh?

What narrative? Negative hit pieces in the WaPo? How does that help Sanders campaign get on 'solid footing'?

Can you explain what you mean more clearly?

[NCTraveler]

69. Don't listen to what people are saying.

Solid strategy.

[FlatBaroque]

4. Buy from Amazon, feed a hungry oligarch /

[dana_b]

76. oh that's right! The CEO of Amazon owns

much of the WP and loves Hillary, right?

Typical!

[onehandle]

5. News for the loser tends to be negative. See: News for Rubio. nt

[Hissyspit]

7. Most of these are opinion pieces.

And he didn't lose the debate.

It's a really awful bias on WaPo's part to be defending.

[onehandle]

9. All seem to be analysis for bad news.

The top right headline sums it up well.

[chervilant]

46. Pathetic really,

ignoring WAPO's evident bias and journalistic dishonesty. Not surprising, though.



(Save your time and energy, you're the latest addition to my IL.)

[stevenleser]

32. Another excellent point.nt

[livetohike]

8. Are any of these headlines lies? Supporters whine

that the media is ignoring Bernie, then when a barrage of coverage comes out, that's not good enough.

[Doctor_J]

14. Where is the headline that says Hillary agrees with Ted Cruz (and all of the republicans)

on capital punishment, TPP, war in the middle east, for profit healthcare, and social security cuts? Or that she admits to supporting a ban on abortion? Or that she is as corrupt as any candidate in history?

[Nye Bevan]

10. Love a free press.

It's not like the WP is forcing people at gunpoint to buy their newspaper and read their articles.

[Dustlawyer]

23. Free my ass! Hillary traded lots of future interviews when she is POTUS to get this!

[gordyfl]

26. And Future Tax Beaks and Mergers, etc.

[Kip Humphrey]

43. HEADLINE: DU no longer defends Democrats from hostile press - eye opening!

[Nye Bevan]

49. Wait.... so it's OK for me to post on DU that I think Hillary won the debate over Bernie,

but not acceptable for me to point out that a newspaper is free to make the same observation?

[Kip Humphrey]

50. Way to minimize tacit approval! My post stands.

[Hiraeth]

71. stands head and shoulders above the fray. yes, it does.

[msanthrope]

12. Welcome to what GD:P looks like for an HRC supporter. nt

[Bread and Circus]

18. You are welcome to leave DU if you are not in tune with what is important to most of its members.

No one is forcing you to be here.

[msanthrope]

35. Oh no....it's just getting good here. nt

[Bread and Circus]

72. Good, we are all having fun!

[Bluenorthwest]

24. Really? Here are some OP's from GDP right now...

"If Bernie bans fracking, will he take responsibility when price of oil goes right back up?"

"Wow, Bernie did terrible at the debate."

""Bernie Sanders ailenates his natural allies. He is completely ineffective as a lobbyist..."

""‘Ghetto’ gaffe highlights Bernie Sanders campaign’s struggle with race."

"I think we need to face facts regarding Bernie as a candidate."

"Ooop....Bernie's Selma Twitter Gaffe..."

"Koch brothers, NRA, and Heritage Foundation have all come to Sanders' defense in the last 24 hours ."

"Washington state lawmakers criticize Sanders' disparaging of Ex-Im Bank."

"NRA in 2004 lobbying for Sanders' backed gun immunity bill."

"Bernie just lost MICHIGAN AND OHIO"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=forum&id=1251


And that's not even all of them. Of course many are by the same crew of few repeating their swipes as they have been for months.....

[Thor_MN]

44. How many posts did you have to skip to compile that list?

I consider myself neutral in the Sanders/Clinton battle, I'll vote for whoever wins the nomination. You will undoubtedly think I'm against you, but what I am for is truth. Go back and objectively look at the posts you skipped searching for anti-Sanders posts in GDP.

To my eyes the GDP posts run about 50% anti-Clinton , 30% anti-Sanders and 20% neutral/pro-whoever. Which is depressing that so much time is wasted on attacks, it's like half the people are GOP trolls sowing discord.

IMO, the OP is silly. The right wing rags are going to start with the big guns once the nominee is determined. If it's Clinton, they have shot their wad over the past 35 years. If it's Sanders, he has been ignored. They will print anything they want and their readers will lap it up.

[dana_b]

79. oh thanks to the admins for the ignore feature

I can't see most of those.

[stevenleser]

33. Exactly. Sauce for the goose. nt

[Bluenorthwest]

40. That's funny. Look at all the Bernie Bashing OP's I listed from GDP which you two insist is like

the WaPost's one sided hackery. GDP bashes both candidates. You and the person you are agreeing with here both make some of those OP's. Open GDP and there are always OP's bashing both candidates. Any honest person can see that and thus reporting the opposite is an odd choice.
Funny that many are willing to just say things and hope the rubes are willing to bite....

[Doctor_J]

13. Right wing establishment paper loves right wing establishment candidate. Surprise!

The "not a real democrat" is actually the most democratic senator of the year.

[Octafish]

15. Jeff Bezos loves Fascism.

He wins when We lose.

[Skwmom]

16. The Owner of the WP, the Amazon Warehouse Sweatshop King, knows who will deliver for him and his

buddies.

[Bluenorthwest]

17. That's what Washington Post does for a living, it's Amazon's opinion crafting wing....

They type up anything, as the lies about Danny Lyon's photos so clearly demonstrated. Offer them a biscuit, they jump up and do what it takes to get that biscuit.

[Donkees]

19. (January) - "Bernie Sanders Just Unleashed on Media Pundits in the Most Devastating Way Possible"

"Bernie Sanders Just Unleashed on Media Pundits in the Most Devastating Way Possible"


“People are telling us, whether it’s the Washington Post editorial board or anybody else, our ideas are too ambitious — can’t happen. Too bold — really? Well, here’s something which is really bold. In the last 30 years, there has been a massive transfer of wealth from the middle class and working families of this country. The middle class has become poorer and trillions of dollars have been transferred to the top one-tenth of 1 percent… Where was The Washington Post to express concern that the middle class was shrinking? Where was The Washington Post talking about this radical transformation of America?”

Sanders continued his salvo, fact-checking their record. “Check out where all the geniuses on the editorial page were with regard to the invasion of Iraq,” Sanders said.

In fact, The Nation reported in 2014 that the Washington Post published more than 140 stories promoting the Iraq War on its front page in the months before the invasion, and the paper received numerous other criticisms for their reporting.

Bernie Sanders famously voted against the Iraq War, contrary to the vast majority of Congress at the time, including Democratic frontrunner and then-Senator Hillary Clinton.

http://usuncut.com/politics/bernie-sanders-response-to-washington-post-editorial-is-perfect/

[pberq]

88. Thanks for posting this. Just amazing

[Mbrow]

22. K&R

[jpb33]

25. The WP

The WP along with the NYT still think it is the 20th century and actually have attitudes of the 19th century. They are still under the impression that people actually respect their opinions or buy their paper.

The WP, NYT, along with many other papers are in the bubble. They go around patting each other on the back thinking they still have the pull they once had before the internet. Why does one think the WP sold out a few years ago. Not only did they sell out, they sold out to a billionaire who wanted his own apper so he could peddle his own agenda. The problem is no one buys the WP anymore. Have you seen their subscriber and advertising #s, downhill every year, along with their revenues. In 20 years there will be no more WP or NYT. And the more they peddle the opinions of the rich the quicker their demise will come.

This goes for CNN and MSNBC. For example Chris Matthews HRC cheerleading, has anyone seen his ratings? The same goes for Hayes & Maddow. Their ratings are downright laughable. Gillagan's Island reruns do better #s than all 3 shows combined.

[Carolina]

30. The WP

isn't worth its paper and ink. A useless rag fit only for lining dog crates.

Starting selling out during every breathless excerpt of the Starr report, but became completely worthless during the buildup to and ultimate invasion of Iraq

Fuck the WP

[Trust Buster]

36. Sanders performed badly in the Flint debate.

He came off as a "burn the house down" candidate who is ackward when speaking outside the sphere of economic issues. This is a classic pragmatism vs. idealism matchup. The above Washington Post articles merely reflect that reality IMO.

[Helen Borg]

39. Your opinion is noted.

[FailureToCommunicate]

38. The kitchen sink comes in many forms.

Stuff like this only confirms people's belief in a Main $tream Media bias towards the establishment candidate.

Thanks, Ronald Reagan, for eliminating the Fairness Doctrine in 1987.

[NurseJackie]

41. Long overdue if you ask me.

(I know, I know ... "But nobody asked you, Jackie!")

[book_worm]

42. And probably 50,000 or more negative stories on Hillary since 1992

Get used to it. If he is going to be a serious candidate his supporters will have to suck it up.

[TheCowsCameHome]

47. You ought to start a thread with that. Title it: "So Funny"

[Skwmom]

56. They have propped up their corporate puppet for months. n/t

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

45. Under the bus with you WP

[Trajan]

55. Firstly ... The WP has not been particularly friendly to Democrats

Since time began ...

The WP was never ON the bus ....

I read all those horrible stories - it was a dastardly day at the WP, and yet, you approve of this?

Let me know, so I can block you from here on out ...

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

85. Yet I approve of this?

No I'm making fun of the fact that anyone who doesn't agree with or writes anything less than positive about Bernie Sanders is automatically dismissed as a Hillary stooge. The list includes those such as Rachel Maddow, Nate Silver, John Lewis and Paul Krugman.

If you want to block me and hide in your echo chamber go right ahead.

[Hissyspit]

96. 1. The WaPo sucks.

2. It's clearly more than anyone writing something less than positive about Sanders.

It was a great paper once.

[Hissyspit]

95. Because the Washington Post sucks?

Buried articles critical of the lead up to the Iraq war.

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

98. It's actually quite informative

You just need to read the whole thing.

[Hissyspit]

99. So just ignore their massive failures on covering the Bush administration?

http://www.thenation.com/article/eleven-years-how-washington-post-helped-give-us-iraq-war/

The New York Times and Judith Miller get much of the blame for the media failures in the run-up to the Iraq invasion, so let me shine a light here on the Washington Post. My book So Wrong for So Long reviews the article Kurtz wrote for the Post in 2004, taking the newspaper to task for some of its misconduct (the paper itself did not assign is own probe).

Because of the notoriety surrounding Judith Miller, the Post’s almost equally poor coverage and opinion pieces drew too little attention after WMD were not discovered. The Post ran Kurtz’s critical August 12, 2004, piece on the front page, something it inevitably failed to do with stories skeptical of the march to war.

By the Post’s own admission, in the months before the war, it ran more than 140 stories on its front page promoting the war, while contrary information “got lost,” as one Post staffer told Kurtz. So allow me to pursue a few points (see my book for much more on media misconduct in war coverage). First, two quotes (beyond the Woodward gem) from Post staffers that speak for themselves:

• “There was an attitude among editors: Look, we’re going to war, why do we even worry about all the contrary stuff?” —Pentagon correspondent Thomas Ricks.

• “We are inevitably the mouthpiece for whatever administration is in power.“ —Reporter Karen DeYoung.

[lsewpershad]

48. Fear

Of the people's revolution

[Renew Deal]

51. But online polls say he won the debate

So it must be true

[fredamae]

52. This is what Pants Wetting and PANIC

looks like when the 1% and their congressional "worker bees" begin to lose their "nut".
It's going to get worse....much, much worse. Shut off the bull, stay focused upon reality and don't fall for the "psy-oped campaign crap"

I think Gandhi might have been aware something real here:
“First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, and then you win.”

― Mahatma Gandhi"

[beachbum bob]

53. so reporting what a candidate is saying and doing that isn't all rah-rah-rah is

negative....heres a small piece of advice...you definitely woin't like it when the right wing machine levels their cannons at bernie....and he and his supporters are totally ill prepared to handle that

[Skwmom]

54. Pay for play baby. Amazon is racking up those millions, feeding at the public trough.

[Red Oak]

57. This campaign has allowed the newspapers to show their real colors.

We'll see if it impacts them after the election.

But yeah, their censorship of good news and drumbeat of bad is truly pathetic behavior. 1% all the way.

[blackspade]

58. Standard tactics used by the Money classes.

If you can't argue the merits or policy, smear, insinuate, and make shit up.

[WillyT]

60. I Think We Crashed FAIR's Servers...

Have not been able to log on for some time now.

[EndElectoral]

61. Has Capehart ever apologized or retracted their swift boat hit piece on Bernie from the Post?

[Laughing Mirror]

83. I would think not

A promotion is in order for that malleable young scribe.

[kstewart33]

62. That's what the media does.

Remember about a month ago when Hillaryhate stories were the norm - Politico, Washington Post, CNN, heck even The New York Times?

Now the media has turned on Bernie at least for awhile. They'll step away in a week or so.

[Matariki]

63. Bought. And paid for.

[Freddie Stubbs]

65. Negative stories about a negative candidate. That's how it works.

[Hissyspit]

97. Bwaha!

Yeah, that's what's going on.

Right.

[UglyGreed]

67. As some have stated

there is no bias and those who dare to call out such actions are wearing tin foil hats.........

[Hiraeth]

70. I expect nothing less from that conservative rag.

[Bread and Circus]

73. And that's 14 more stories than they ran on him in the previous 9 months!!!

Just a bit of humor

[Cheese Sandwich]

74. We have to build our own media

[whatchamacallit]

75. So?

<standard hilbot response>

[Lizzie Poppet]

77. WaPo is basically a multi-corporate shared PR department.

It's useless for informational purposes outside what they get from the wire services. Oh, how the mighty have fallen...

[Jester Messiah]

78. So, business as usual in the fair-and-balanced world of the corporate media.

This country is so beyond fucked.

[Cheese Sandwich]

80. This is sickening.

[Laughing Mirror]

81. Just doing their job representing their interests

They're Washington Post, after all. Even though I'm from Washington, I always knew their interests were not mine, and probably not yours either. I'd start wondering if things were otherwise. Even whenever I see something in that rag that portrays Sanders in any way in a positive light, I am always suspicious of what they write.

I'm sure they don't even use fact checkers, or proofreaders or editors anymore. The just type up what they're told and hit send.

[GoneFishin]

82. Right wing presstitutes.

[rgbecker]

84. In America, we have the free-est press money can buy.

[AzDar]

86. K & R

[HereSince1628]

91. Mea Culpa. I wasn't happy about Sanders suggestion that republicans were mentally ill.

Although up to this time, Sanders has pretty much limited his comments on mental illness to gun control arguments, which helps stigmatize people with mental disorders as the cause of all gun violence and I think that's rather more dangerous to people with mental disorders.

This exact sort of bigotry using a disease state to characterize a political opponent is -very- common on DU and I don't and won't expect DUers for Sanders to see it as the unfortunate practice that I feel it it is.

It'd be refreshing if Sanders noticed, and mentioned, unemployment rates among the mentally ill, and suggested some way to overcome the prejudice and discrimination that exists. But, I don't expect that either.

[HereSince1628]

92. WP criticized Trump for stigmatizing language about people with mental disorders, too

And yes, they ignored similar among his rivals.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/inspired-life/wp/2016/02/19/nut-job-wacko-basket-case-donald-trumps-put-downs-perpetuate-mental-health-stigma/

‘Nut job,’ ‘wacko,’ ‘basket case’: How Donald Trump’s put-downs may impact mental health stigma

By Colby Itkowitz February 19

Break to the closing paragraph...

Weeding out these words will be viewed by some as another example of political correctness overreach. And ceasing use of certain common words is not going to end long-held stigmas.

But mental health experts say language choice matters. That few flinch when those words are used as insults is indicative of how discrimination persists.

“Stigmatizing words, stereotypes and portrayals end up helping to shape society’s attitudes,” Carolla said. “You can’t say it’s harmless, because it isn’t.”

[beedle]

93. They called him a liar

When was the last time any MSM ever called any politician a liar? Up until they had to go after a real progressive they bent over backwards to present right wing lies as 'the other opinion'.

Now that a real progressive threatens their comfortable little fiefdoms, suddenly calling out 'lies' is suddenly fashionable ... well at least for one particular person anyway.

Oh, and the 'lies'?

1 - "thinks trade protectionism will trigger a massive inflow of manufacturing jobs"
2 - "pretends that there would be no foreign policy consequences from a U.S. shift back to the days of Smoot-Hawley"

Both of which are arguably actual logical consequences of those actions, but which even if they weren't are not anything Sanders actually ever claimed.

1 - trade protectionism is used all the time to protect a countries jobs ... America often uses it (it's used to protect the US lumber industry from the Canadian lumber industry for example, and it does indeed protect American jobs ... if there was no such protectionism then Canada, a country larger than the USA, made up almost entirely of forests, would put US lumber producers out of business in a day.)

2 - Sure there would be consequences, and these consequences would be that jobs would stay in America and consumers would have to pay an extra $2 for their $300 Air Jordan's and $900 iPads.

[Blue Owl]

100. Just Karl Roves toilet reading material

n/t

[CentralMass]

102. I wave my bared buttocks in their general direction.

[SMC22307]

103. Ah, yes, the former mighty Washington Post.

What a joke it is now.