Why the Media Hates John Edwards By Larry Sakin

[Demeter]

OpEdNews

Original Content at http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_larry_sa_070603_why_the_media_hates_.htm


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
June 3, 2007

Why the Media Hates John Edwards

By Larry Sakin


In every presidential campaign, there seems to be one particular candidate the media sours on. Back in the race for the 2004 Democratic nomination, former Vermont governor Howard Dean was the favorite dog to kick. Dean, who successfully added some very progressive ideas to the steady diet of moderate wonkiness expressed by his fellow candidates, just couldn't get an even break from the press even though he polled effectively in a number of states. In 2000, the media was all over former Vice-President Al Gore, who the media portrayed as a policy stiff unable to generate enough human warmth to make himself visible to the electorate.


This time around, the media is aiming their big guns at former Senator John Edwards. In an excellent Common Dreams piece entitled Are Media Out to Get John Edwards? Author Jeff Cohen shows the media disdain for candidates addressing economic class issues and those that criticize the politics reaping major profits for media owners....But that's just a small part of the story. What the media disdains are candidates who speak intelligently and pointedly about policy which affect Americans everyday. The reason: the job of the media is to sell you hairdryers, snow blowers, and pre-packaged political fear....

What does all of this have to do with John Edwards? Like Dean and Gore before him, Edwards is a threat because he has the personal wealth to run a fairly well-oiled campaign, speaking directly to voters, while criticizing corporate-drafted trade agreements, workers rights, the poor and higher taxes on the rich, all of which are anathema to the ownership classes. He and other candidates like him have the ability to damage the perceptions the ownership class has tried so hard to form in the minds of the electorate....It doesn't really matter if you are for or against Edwards' candidacy. The media will attack any candidate that make people think about the issues affecting them. If Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton addressed similar policies in their campaigns, the media would attack them as well. The media has no interest in presenting maverick ideas- its main purpose is to maintain the status quo.


Should John Edwards remain popular up through the primaries, you can count on a smear job similar to the one they gave to Dean in 2004. Edwards will appear a bit too enthusiastic at some rally or flub some small part of a speech, and the media will punish him for it, over and over again making him look inept and out of touch. Because no candidate is allowed to interfere with the campaign wishes and caviar dreams of the media elite.





Authors Website: www.mytown.ca/sakin

Authors Bio: Larry Sakin is a former non-profit medical organization executive and music producer. His writing can be found on Mytown.ca, Blogcritics, OpEd News, The People's Voice, Craig's List and The Progressive magazine. He also advocates for literacy and directs The Progressive Principles Project, and is a National Coordinator for the DFA offshoot group WeDemocrats.

[phantom power]

1. Larry is still missing the mark.

The media is piling on because Edwards is a Democratic candidate. Whoever ultimately wins the nomination can expect precisely the same treatment. Who it is, doesn't really matter at all.

[dennis4868]

5. That's what I was thinking....

when reading the article. After Dean was out of the race the media chose to bash Kerry for the sports he played and the way he dressed, the tan on his face, etc...there is no end!

[LSparkle]

2. Hartmann was talking about the smearing of Dean beginning on "Hardball"

after he said he was in favor of breaking up big broadcast monopolies (such as GE).

Just the other day, Tweety had Jim "Coronary" Cramer on and when asked which candidate Wall Street fears the most, he replied (no surprise) JOHN EDWARDS. Edwards' positions challenge the "order of things" -- the big corporations continuing to have a hotline to the White House, the "right" people staying in charge in D.C. (no need to change those dinner party invitation lists).

I'm glad at least this time we (and Edwards) have been warned that this is coming so hopefully it won't be taken sitting down. Calling Joe Trippi, who just happens to be working for Edwards ...

[nashville_brook]

3. there's definitely a correlation here (speaking out against poverty and big media) -- and

getting the raw end of media coverage? is there causation? most likely.

[dave_p]

4. Edwards is no Dean

It's the foreign policy, stupid. That's why they crucified Dean, not some fake blue-collar-guy rhetoric. Just don't challenge them on how corporate America projects its power beyond its borders.

Edwards is the last guy to do that; it's just unfortunate for him that Hillary ain't a guy.

[Joe Chi Minh]

6. Sure.... People are not bothered about what goes on in America!

Why would they? If anyone's as thick as 2 short planks, it's you.