Hilary supporters: Does it seem that the media is biased against her?

[bluedawg12]

Hilary supporters: Does it seem that the media is biased against her?

Here’s page 1 out of 725 pages.


http://mediamatters.org/issues_topics/hillary_clinton



Wash. Post's Quinn suggested "personal ambition" led Clinton and Silda Wall Spitzer to "stand by her man" because "there was something in it for her"
Wednesday, March 12, 2008

Moos distorts Clinton's 60 Minutes comments, blames Obama's middle name -- which she was among first to highlight -- for false perception that he's Muslim
Tuesday, March 18, 2008

Hannity ignored McCain's step back on 'No new taxes,' distorted Clinton's health care plan
Friday, March 14, 2008

Noonan, Brzezinski mischaracterized Clinton's 60 Minutes response about Obama's religion
Friday, March 14, 2008

Time cited Mitchell in purporting to examine Clinton's role in Northern Ireland peace process, but not Mitchell's affirmation of Clinton's statements
Thursday, March 13, 2008

Margaret Carlson falsely claimed, "Everyone responsible for bringing peace to Northern Ireland is on the record saying claim to involvement there is complete fiction"
Thursday, March 13, 2008

On Morning Joe, Quinn repeated claim that Clinton and Silda Wall Spitzer stand beside their husbands because "they don't want to lose that power"
Thursday, March 13, 2008

Wash. Post's Quinn suggested "personal ambition" led Clinton and Silda Wall Spitzer to "stand by her man" because "there was something in it for her"
Wednesday, March 12, 2008

Hume joins other media in ignoring McCain's failure to commit to tax return release
Wednesday, March 12, 2008

Apparently ignorant of Clinton and Obama plans, Matthews has some advice for them on health-care coverage
Tuesday, March 11, 2008

Marc Rudov on "the downside" of a woman president: "You mean besides the PMS and the mood swings, right?"
Tuesday, March 11, 2008

New Yorker's Lizza "gall" by Clinton's 60 Minutes response, but reported only small part of it
Tuesday, March 11, 2008

Andrew Sullivan declared Clintons have "a touch of the zombies about them: unkillable, they move relentlessly forward"
Monday, March 10, 2008

Ignoring repeated statements making her position clear, NY Post asserted "Clinton hedged on whether Obama is a Muslim"
Monday, March 10, 2008

NY Times' Herbert misrepresented Clinton's comments about Obama's religion, asserted they were "one of the sleaziest moments of the campaign"
Sunday, March 9, 2008

Imus: Clinton's election to Senate due to "her fat, stupid husband ... getting BJs ... in the Oval Office"
Friday, March 7, 2008

Discussing Clinton's tax returns, MSNBC's Buchanan did not note that McCain has not released his returns
Friday, March 7, 2008

Des Moines Register, AP left out McCain reversals in reporting on his immigration position
Thursday, March 6, 2008

Matthews again accused Clinton of fostering doubt about Obama's religion
Thursday, March 6, 2008

Matthews: "Pennsylvania prefers a beefier sort to either of these people, a more rustic, tougher sort than" Obama or Clinton
Thursday, March 6, 2008

Time's Jay Newton-Small asked about "concerns" that "the Clintons might yet again burn down the Democratic Party"
Thursday, March 6, 2008

..........

http://mediamatters.org/items/200801110002
Does Chris Matthews have a problem with women?

Using overtly sexist language, he has referred to Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) as a "she devil" and compared her to a "strip-teaser." He has called her "witchy" and likened her voice to "fingernails on a blackboard." He has referred to men who support her as "castratos in the eunuch chorus." He has suggested Clinton is not "a convincing mom" and said "modern women" like Clinton are unacceptable to "Midwest guys." He has called her "Madame Defarge" and "Nurse Ratched."

..........
http://mediamatters.org/items/200801110002

Matthews on Clinton's performance: "good enough here for women who wanted to root for her anyway" (1/9/2008)

With women, Matthews administers the "Chris Matthews test" (1/17/2008)

Chris Matthews addresses firestorm (1/17/2008)

Page 1 out of 725
.........




edited for graphics (jpg format)

[murielm99]

1. Of course they are biased against her. n/t

[NoodleyAppendage]

4. Shit on the MSM for DECADES and then she expects special treatment? Typical.

Hillary has done little to "court" the media over the last 20 years, but now that she needs them to suit her pursuit of power she expect them now to turn on a dime and be friendly? I wouldn't expect anything less from Mrs. Entitled.

Also, you argument is basically hollow because the media is being equally, if not more, hostile to Obama. You haven't been able to turn the TV on for the past week or so without seeing an endless masturbation of Wright speeches.

J

[bluedawg12]

6. Why should anyone have to "court" the media?

Is that what she has to do to get fair coverage?

[NoodleyAppendage]

43. Media are people too. You can't be continually antagonistic and expect goodwill. n/t

J

[Rageneau]

44. Do you feel the same way about cops? the FBI?

So you think the Media are right in manipulating the truth, depending on whether they like you or not?

How about the Prosecuting Attorney? Should you cooperate with him if he decides to wrongly indict you for child molestation? Would you reccommen agreeing with him and going into your cell meekly?

Madison and Jefferson concocted the Bill of Rights specifically to guard against thinking like yours becoming law.

[NoodleyAppendage]

47. I hear you. And, in principal you are right. But, in reality our nation of laws is run by people.

There are guidelines and laws that constrain individuals' actions, but the motivation to action can be influenced by others and external incentives.

Piss off anyone and there's likely to repercussions.

J

[Mags]

46. Are you guys so simple that you think BO hasn't courted and bowed to the media?

[GarbagemanLB]

2. There is absolutely no room for Hillary to play victim after the way the media played Wright 24/7.

[buff2]

3. That wasn't Hillary's fault

but of course she will get the blame for it,as usual.

[bluedawg12]

9. A little sunlight on the press IS uncomforable for some? n/t

[murielm99]

5. That has nothing to do with Clinton. n/t

[bluedawg12]

7. She's not playing victim and don't blame the target. n/t

[MethuenProgressive]

8. The MSM hates the Clintons. Always have, always will.

It's a shame fellow Democrats pile on with glee.

[bluedawg12]

10. It's stunning how fellow Democrats repeat the biased pressn/t

[UALRBSofL]

12. You are absolutely right about that

I find it interesting how Hillary has managed to wade through the drudge and come out barely scathed. This could probably be a good theme for a thesis paper. :)

[bluedawg12]

16. I'm not sure how unscathed she is- a lot of this media bias

get's spread around as fact and pops up in many places.

But it would make a good paper- wonder how she puts up with it.

[bluedawg12]

18. Here's a bit of below the belt scum baggery

http://mediamatters.org/items/200803120005

>>Wash. Post's Quinn suggested "personal ambition" led Clinton and Silda Wall Spitzer to "stand by her man" because "there was something in it for her"
Summary: In a report on "powerful men who cheat and the women who stand stoically by them," CBS News' Nancy Cordes aired a clip of The Washington Post's Sally Quinn saying, "I can only think that ambition, their own personal ambition, is part of why they stick by these men, because they are accomplished women in their own right. And so, why would a Hillary Clinton or a Silda stand by her man and allow herself to be humiliated unless there was something in it for her?" <<

[GumboYaYa]

11. ROFLMAO, the media bias in favor of Hillary is the only thing keeping her ghost of a campaign alive.

She is broke and behind in every measurable available from the prior votes. She can not win this thing. The only thing that is keeping the sinking ship afloat is a compliant media. Any other candidate and this thing would have been over a month ago.

[bluedawg12]

14. Yeah, "the media whores" who extoll everything her opponents do.

It is laughable.

And pretty nauseating. :yuck:

[VolcanoJen]

13. Please don't take this route again. It's not a winner.

She claimed media bias after losing Iowa. It helped her win New Hampshire.

She claimed media bias after that awful losing string she went on in February. She went on SNL. She complained about "getting the first question." It may have helped her win Ohio (I don't think it did, but some see it that way).

This trick isn't going to work three times in a row. The slant the media has taken now is quite different than the one they (admitedly) took post-Iowa. They're vetting her, and they're challenging her claims of electability. It's time to do that, and matching up one's words with actual events as they occurred is not "bias." It's "reporting."

If Hillary has any chance at this thing, she really shouldn't play victim for a third time. It's beneath her. And, far more important than that, I can't think of anything less presidential.

[bluedawg12]

15. What route should I take? Your route- that's a winner?

this is not from her campaign.

of wait- everything is from her and her campaign.

[VolcanoJen]

17. Here's a route you might want to explore: Reality.

Hillary's not going to win the nomination, let alone the presidency, banking on the media treating her with kid gloves.

The reality of the situation is only now beginning to sink in, during this lull between primaries. With the release of her First Lady schedules, the press has an obligation to only now match up those schedules with her statements and other evidence to the contrary. That's not bias. That's reporting.

The reality that she has run a shockingly awful campaign is also beginning to sink in with mainstream media figures. The delegate math hasn't been there for her since she failed to construe any kind of post-Super Tuesday strategy, and as Obama racked up landslide after landslide, if anything the media was lax in informing the American electorate how the Democratic Party chooses nominees and let us believe the thing was still "close." It wasn't. It isn't.

If you want to take a third shot at claiming "the media treats Hillary badly" after watching Reverend Wright on Perpetual Dean Scream Loop for a week, you are welcome to do so. But, it's a reality clash. And you're on the wrong side of it, this time.

[bluedawg12]

19. Here's a reality check for you- this was an OP about themedia and Hilary

and you are turning it into a story about your candidate.

The press has been at Hilary long before the Wright story broke and seemingly stunned the 4th estate from their hero worship.

[VolcanoJen]

23. No, I'm responding to your thread.

Granted, it said "Hillary Supporters" and I am most certainly not a supporter of hers in the Primary. So, if you'd like to perpetuate the fantasy that somehow, once again, the only reason Hillary is losing this nomination is because of the media, then I'll just let you go ahead and do that.

[bluedawg12]

25. Funny, how I don't enjoy it when you put words in my mouth

"So, if you'd like to perpetuate the fantasy that somehow, once again, the only reason Hillary is losing this nomination is because of the media, then I'll just let you go ahead and do that."

No where did I say that.

This is not an analysis of who is winning or losing and why.

It is a series of facts from an outside source and media watchdog group.

[VolcanoJen]

28. But I could do the same thing... it's a list, not a series of facts.

Plug in "Barack Obama" into that search engine and I'll bet you could reach the same conclusion of your OP, but with a different result.

For example (McCain hits omitted):

Buchanan on Obama's race speech: "We hear the grievances. Where is the gratitude?"
Saturday, March 22, 2008

Limbaugh: "Obama has disowned his white half ... he's decided he's got to go all in on the black side"
Friday, March 21, 2008

Hannity on passport security breach: "Seems to me Barack Obama is looking for anything to distract from the story of Jeremiah Wright"
Friday, March 21, 2008

On Glenn Beck, Blackwell's false claim: Obama "basically said that, while he was in Reverend Wright's church, he embraces Louis Farrakhan"
Thursday, March 20, 2008

David Gregory allowed Republican strategist to claim: "Barack Obama's talked about paratroopers in Islamabad"
Thursday, March 20, 2008

Limbaugh falsely claimed minister who attacked Obama is "pro-Hillary"
Thursday, March 20, 2008

Fox News Radio's Sullivan predicted African-American "riots in the streets" if Obama were to lose to McCain or Clinton
Wednesday, March 19, 2008

And so on.

[bluedawg12]

35. Bingo! The pattern begings after Wright and is the usual RW suspects.

Hilary has been geting it from day one and many of them like tweety and KO and Howard Fineman and Mika Brezyinski (sp?) are not right wing vs. left wing- they ARE the left of center media.

I expect limpbags, and the rest to pile on any Dem.

[VolcanoJen]

38. I could go back quite a bit farther, if you want to continue this exercise.

You know that I can. Just off the top of my head, do you remember the "Is Barack Black Enough/Is Barch Too Black" meme that dominated the MSM in the run-up to Iowa?

And I only chose my "list" from the front page of the search engine results. Drilling down into the date, CNN especially took on a right-wing view of the Obama/Wright nontroversy.

[bluedawg12]

39. I have to go to a family get together- I'll check back later- Thank you!

Thanks DU'ers for the replies- agree or not it's always good to hear differing POV's.

But, it is a Holiday and I have to go for now.

Talk among yourselves. :)

[VolcanoJen]

41. Happy Easter, bluedawg.

I appreciate the discourse, as well!

:hug:

[PM7nj]

20. They are biased against all Dems

Earlier this year I would say, yes, they are very biased against Hillary. Now, I feel they are much more biased against Obama. It all depends on who they feel most threatened by.

[bluedawg12]

21. That's corrrect:. 60% of written media is conservative.

http://mediamatters.org/reports/oped/report

[Igel]

42. False statement.

http://mediamatters.org/reports/oped/report itself says "oped".

When Media Matters did their survey, 60% of papers had more conservatives involved with their *op-ed* pages than liberals. This is different from saying "60% of written media", unless we conclude that the newspaper is entirely op-ed. But you'd get to show that; Media Matters didn't.

I've heard quibbles over their definitions of "conservative" and "progressive", but didn't pay much attention to them.

Polls usually show that the reporters themselves are mostly dems. Haven't heard any rumors about how the news editors trend.

[BenDavid]

22. Here is my take on the whoremedia: the obama camp with a

willing press played the race card, not the Clintons. Simple as that.

[bluedawg12]

27. You betcha. Then, they canonized Obama's speech

on the MSM.

To be sure- not the RW media- they will be using sound bites until the chickens come home to rooooost!

[Bullet1987]

24. Obama goes through the worse week of his campaign and Clinton

supporters still complain and moan.

[bluedawg12]

26. I posted facts that's not complaining and moaning. n/t

[bluedawg12]

29. Sen. Obama's speech met with high MSM approval.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/19/opinion/19wed1.html?ex=1363579200&en=963aa97f8aece603&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss

Andrew Sullivan

Chris Mathews

Then they blamed Clnton for not jumping into the fray. :yuck:

[VolcanoJen]

30. Just because his speech was met with high MSM approval...

... does not mean it actually sucked and they're merely shilling for him. Venture out into the blogs, talk to some coworkers, read your local paper, take a glance at the letters to the editor. It was a great speech, The End.

Is that really difficult for you to understand?

[bluedawg12]

32. VolcanoJen- what it means is that the MSM loved the speech. Do you think that is bias? n/t

[VolcanoJen]

36. No, I don't think that is bias.

Bias:

- A particular tendency or inclination, esp. one that prevents unprejudiced consideration of a question; prejudice.
- Statistics - a systematic as opposed to a random distortion of a statistic as a result of sampling procedure.

Now, do I believe the MSM is bias against Democrats in general? Oh, hell yes, I do. And there is much, much evidence to back that up. Hell, that's what we've been doing here at DU since January 2001!

But if the MSM loved a speech that seemed to also be loved by average Americans and YouTube viewers, well, no, I don't think there's any evidence of bias in this particular circumstance. In fact, considering the events and coverage that led up to the speech, I'm rather shocked that they didn't show obvious bias by dismissing it summarily.

[anonymous171]

31. Are they spouting these talking points on a loop?

Media (right now): WRIGHT WRIGHT WRIGHT WRIGHT WRIGHT WRIGHT

[bluedawg12]

33. Yeah, they are. How does it feel? n/t

[Mike03]

34. I think so, but I'm so tired of being called out for saying that sexism is just as big an issue here

as racism. She is beling held to a ridiculously high standard, and I fail to see how her campaign is "gutter" politics. What has she done that other politicians running for high office have not done to their opponents? She has not, IMO, crossed the line.

But what is the issue about Spitzer? That does sound a bit ominous.

[NashVegas]

37. Does a Bear Shit In the Woods?

KURTZ (12/29/07): For example, Hillary Clinton. Let's say she doesn't win Iowa. Let's say she gets edged out by 1,000 votes. Is the press going to savage her as a loser?

MILBANK: The press will savage her no matter what, pretty much.

KURTZ: If she wins?

MILBANK: Well, obviously if she wins by any great margin—the press with Hillary Clinton, it's a poisonous relationship. And I visited the various campaigns out there. It's a mutual sort of disregard. And they really have their knives out for her, there's no question about it out there.

[bluedawg12]

40. BBL- Happy Easter to those participate!

Thanks guys!

[MoonRiver]

45. Does a bear shit in the woods?

:shrug:

[Skip Intro]

48. Clear for all to see.