Media tainted by anti-Clinton bias

[candice]

...which is reminiscent of how Gore was shafted and empty-suit Bu$h elevated to be a contender.

By Bill Maxwell, St. Petersburg Times Columnist
Published March 9, 2008

Excerpts from a journalist who cares about his profession and its responsibility to the American public. His summation:" With its coverage of the Clinton-Obama campaign, the Fourth Estate has failed miserably."


http://www.sptimes.com/2008/03/09/Opinion/Media_tainted_by_anti.shtml


Several independent watchdog organizations, including Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting and the Center for Media and Public Affairs, have documented persistent and widespread bias against Clinton and in favor of Obama.
The Center for Media and Public Affairs reported that since mid December, when the Iowa caucuses came into play, Obama has received the lion's share of the positive coverage: "From Dec. 16 through Jan. 27, five out of six on-air evaluations of Obama (84 percent) have been favorable, compared to a bare majority (51 percent) of evaluations of Mrs. Clinton. The gap in good press widened since the New Hampshire primary, with Clinton dropping to 47 percent positive comments and Obama holding steady at 83 percent positive.

"NBC's coverage has been the most critical of Clinton - nearly 2 to 1 negative (36 percent positive and to 64 percent negative). Conversely, ABC's coverage was most supportive - nearly 2 to 1 positive (63 percent vs. 37 percent). CBS and Fox were more balanced - 50 percent positive comments on Fox and 56 percent positive on CBS."
The Pew Research Center found a sharp difference in tone between coverage of Clinton and Obama. Here, I also must address the pundits. Most, left and right, have been unfriendly to Clinton, some writing her obit and others advising her to fold up her tent. Obama, on the other hand, has been treated like the Second Coming.

The most surprising finding, at least to me, was the pervasive bias in coverage of the two candidates' foreign policy. "When it comes to foreign policy coverage - perhaps the most important issue in the coming election," Shorenstein wrote in his memo, "the media monitoring group, Media Tenor, found that there was not a single positive story about Hillary Clinton and foreign policy in the month of February."




© Copyright 2002-2008, St. Petersburg Times

[SoFlaJet]

1. WAAAAAAAAAAAAA................

ewerybody hates poor Hillawee.....WWWWWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA.........

[Window]

18. I have decided to stop responding to posts by Hilly supporters.

Everything to be said, has been said ad nauseum. All I can do at this point is laugh my ass off. OMG! The desperation!

[Evergreen Emerald]

24. ignore the messenger, and the truth while keeping your head in the sand

good plan dude.

[Window]

28. LOL!

[BzaDem]

30. LOL!

[Dinger]

33. No Shit (nt)

[cbayer]

25. Promise? nt.

[Window]

27. LOL!

[BzaDem]

29. LOL!

[cbayer]

31. Just teasing you.

I am just over reading these posts where both sides go on and on and on about the same thing using the same talking points and the same ugly weapons that resolve absolutely nothing. That's all.

[Window]

37. Gotcha. No problem.

[anonymous171]

2. Again, Hillary's "Strong showing" in WY.

[Kittycat]

5. I know - even in a win. At least they're picking up on the coattails & IL14

[candice]

8. 2 delegate net for 5 to 2 offices and TV & radio ads versus just radio ads...

...all for a state with 3 electoral votes that will go to the Republican party.

This is a RED state--Cheneyland.

The Clinton campaign doesn't find the caucus process democratic, but at least in Wyoming a small subset of Dems got to vote in secret, without the "winner" be chosen in a shouting match.

[Kittycat]

10. We aren't in the GE, we're in the Primary, and every delegate matters.

Get over yourself. This isn't a 5 state country. If Hillary had her way, she'd suspend voting in every state that "didn't matter" to her.

[movonne]

12. She knew she was running way back when bill was in office..and

maybe they should have seen it coming except I don't think she thought that she would have any trouble running and winning..

[ananda]

3. I find that interesting..

Now I'm wondering why the media fears Clinton..

I do realize that Obama has courted Reeps and
owes much to them....

[CoffeeCat]

17. Did you hear Joe Scarborough talk about this...

....on "Real Time"?

Joe was quite enlightening. Essentially, he said that media members routinely get pulled
aside when they say negative things about both camps. Joe said their bosses do this all
of the time. There is pressure from both camps.

Someone on the show asked why suddenly, the Clinton coverage is so favorable. Joe said because
they are scared, and because the Presidents of the networks have been called and so have
the advertisers. He made it sound as if the Hillary camp threw a large temper tantrum. You
can imagine what went on behind the scenes.

If advertisers are threatening to withhold dollars--isn't that amazing? We always talk about Clinton
being the corporate candidate, and now we're seeing the effects of that. She pulls the trigger and
her corporate buddies phone the president of the network and threaten to stop buying advertising.

My jaw was dropped when Joe said this, because the media turnaround has been so blatant and so
instant, as if someone had flipped a switch. I wondered what in the hell was going on behind
the scenes and now we know--threats, intimidation and corporate collaboration.

I think Joe's comments deserve their own thread. I'll put a transcript up on DU, if I can't
find one online.

[Window]

19. Wow! Very interesting.

Thanks for posting this.

[Skidmore]

21. Ring true somehow since lately

CNN and certain MSNBC programs sound like the communications wings of the Clinton campaign. Shuster was an example so that criticism would be muted.

[MannyGoldstein]

4. I'll Bet Kim Jong Il Gets A Lot Of Negative Bias Too

As does MRSA, emphysema, and global warming.

[DJ13]

6. What utter crap

Watch the news for yourself, count the stories run critical of Clinton and critical of Obama FOR YOURSELF.

She is hands down getting the full support of the MSM beginning with the week prior to March 4th, and it continues to this day.

Clinton.......always the victim........even if theres nothing there.

[EmperorHasNoClothes]

7. Nobody ever stops to think

that maybe the media has more negative reporting on Clinton because there is more to report on? Obama has run a MUCH more positive campaign than Hillary, and the media reporting reflects that.

[dansolo]

9. No, the media is tainted by a money bias

[fascisthunter]

11. One Word: DUBAI

If Obama had this on his record......

[thunder rising]

13. If it's so negative why does the MSM still insist last Tuesday resulted in 3-1 instead of 2-2

[dbonds]

14. I guess this was writen and/or researched before last 2 weeks.

It has a strong pro hillary spin now.

[spooky3]

15. Thanks; Maxwell reports results from two controlled studies

as well as his own observations.

Mediamatters.org has also documented many incidents of anti-Clinton coverage; more recently the media seems not to have decreased these, but instead, now seems to have increased anti-Obama coverage, all the while generally giving McCain a pass or praising him based on misinformation. Guess the corporate media think that's "fair."

[cui bono]

16. Clinton tainted by anti-democratic party bias...

Frankly, she deserves negative coverage. She is behaving in a negative manner which is affecting the Democratic party in a negative way.

[Swamp Rat]

20. If that is the case, then she doesn't stand a chance in the GE, right?

[XemaSab]

22. Reality is tainted by an anti-Clinton bias

:P

[JVS]

36. you said "taint"

[Vinca]

23. I beg to differ. The last 10 days has been an Obama Bashathon

on both MSNBC and CNN. It actually started with the SNL spoof of the debate and slowly escalated until it was a 24/7 trashing right before Texas, Ohio, Rhode Island and Vermont. It was so bad, I was surprised he got any votes in Ohio at all. Then, of course, after those elections, it was cheerleading for Hillary 24/7 and her retaking of the lead, yada, yada. To date, none of them have reported Obama actually got more delegates than Hillary in Texas. They barely acknowledged his Wyoming win. Maybe they'll mention Mississippi on Tuesday if we're lucky. I've also noticed his campaign appearances have been pretty much "disappeared" as well. Hope they cover the inauguration.

[susankh4]

26. Thanks for the link! K&R

[Dinger]

32. Damming Info,

but what can we do about it?

[BuyingThyme]

34. I guess the news is inherently positive when you're

kicking ass.

[JVS]

35. "not a single positive story about Hillary Clinton and foreign policy in the month of February"

:rofl:

No fucking shit, sherlock! That's because she climbed on board Bush's disastrous foreign policy wrt Iraq, and repeated it with her recent votes on Iran.

[Beacool]

38. They didn't even have to document this since it's self evident.

The are few real journalist nowadays, everybody is a pundit. That's why I now get my political news only from PBS and C-Span. The rest of the vultures are only out to create ratings and they don't give a damn about reporting facts or remaining objective.