Looks like the media has launched an anti-Mccain offensive...

So, everyone except the Neocon knows and understands Obama is covered more but that coverage is dominantly NEGATIVE! While McCain is left untouched.

Actually, no. Speaking for those of us who have already gotten out, the broadcast news coverage seen outside of the US (at least in my experience, admittedly anecdotal) has been almost all Barack, all the time. And really, neither Obama nor McCain have been given much trouble directly-only 'reports on reporting' if you will, i.e., 'Magazine cover causes outrage' and so forth. Most original reports that I've seen come with a strong 'they're getting a new leader, thank goodness' slant without much to choose from which will be in the hotseat.

Whichever candidate gets elected, so long as they get the dollar stronger and continue increasing my pension, I'll be happy.

Good morning,
I detest John, Mr. Amnesty, McCain as much as Hussein, Open Borders, Obama. For the Media to opposer Mr. Amnesty, they'll need to forsake their own leftist, liberal principles. It would seem that liberal reporters would be laughing at voters - liberalism wins either way.

Originally posted by Krieger
So, everyone except the Neocon knows and understands Obama is covered more but that coverage is dominantly NEGATIVE! While McCain is left untouched.

Nobody with half a brain is going to believe that most Obama coverage is negative. It goes against everything we see from day to day. In fact, I cant remember the last negative report against Obama outside of Fox News.

I wish citizens would send these propaganda machines a message that we cant stand their out of context snippets that try to sway out vote. What ever happened to Ron Paul during all of those LIVE debates. Why did the CNN hosts only ask Obama, Hillary, and Mitt the questions Americans care about most. Its so obvious that our 24/7 media outlets are CORRUPT and PROPAGANDA. Journalists should be ashamed of theses ridiculous outlets. PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE TURN THE CHANNEL !!!


p.s. Turner and Murdoch are puppet masters with almost as much power as any President. They CONTROL knowledge!

latimesblogs.latimes.com...

The joke's on McCain: Late-night comedians lay off Obama

A hilarious new study of late-night political jokes, due to be released later today, finds the network comedians clearly avoiding humor about Democratic candidate Barack Obama, while piling the jokes on President Bush and Sens. John McCain and Hillary Clinton.

Oh, what a huge surprise!

newsbusters.org...

CNN Producer Pitched 'Video Strategy' to Obama Campaign, Got Job

Kate Albright-Hanna, who runs the Obama campaign's online video operations, got the job after she pitched the campaign “a proposal on video strategy” -- while she was still a CNN producer

Before CNN, she was an intern in the Clinton White House and, in a Dateline NBC story days after the Monica Lewinsky story broke, she was featured by reporter Dawn Fratangelo as one of a group of former interns who “simply don't find it plausible the President of the United States could have an affair with an intern.”

Click here for more information.

reply to post by Dronetek


So would you agree that the media collaborated to get GW elected in 2000 and 2004 because in both elections there was plenty of evidence to show people exactly what they were getting in GW and they failed to expose much of it.

The current state of affairs in this country is not surpising to me. The American people got exactly what they voted for and if they did their research in the first place they would have seen this coming.

reply to post by Lethil



Honestly, I agree. I don't see either McCain nor Obama as being much to vote for. McCain, at least as far as I can tell, is an angry, bitter old man. Obama is riding his "charisma," I don't see it, but anyway, that's what he's doing.

reply to post by Dronetek



More research(not opinion) showing that Obama recieves more negative press than McCain. You may be a 'news junkie' and you may THINK that Obama gets a free pass but the RESEARCH proves otherwise.

Guardian

Originally posted by Krieger
Hahaha!

They did a study,

Who? where? link?

reply to post by Fathom


I already posted it, and now someone else has posted it. Read on to find them.

Edit
And since you probably won't read them but I'll try. I'll REPOST my links, and repost a link someone else provided.

www.washingtontimes.com...

www.cmpa.com...

And this one was provided by someone else.

www.guardian.co.uk...

So yeah, already posted earlier but now being reposted.

[edit on 21-8-2008 by Krieger]

Originally posted by Dronetek
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

 

The media has been covering Barack Obama more, it's true. But a lot of that coverage has been negative.

Its almost as if we're living in two different realities. I'm a new s junkie and I can say with great confidence that I never see anything negative about Obama, unless Fox is laying in to him.

MSNBC,CNN,ABC,NBC and CBS are constantly disproving attacks against Obama and constantly attacking McCain. How in the world you translate that to "always negative against Obama" is really quite striking to me.

They are trying to disprove the attacks and rumors because they are false. If there was false info or attacks against McCain they might have something to disprove.

If McCain is the one who gets the majority of negative attacks, how come I can list rumor after rumor about Obama that has no basis and somehow makes it into the mainstream yet there are almost no rumors or negative things about McCain making it into the mainstream. I dont hear MSM talking about the details of McCains first marriage or the Keating Five.

Do a google news search on any of the rumors about McCain and then search the ones about Obama. 1000 hits in the last month for keating five and 8000 hits for Obama a muslim. Same for the google search, 4,600,000 hits for Barack Obama a muslim and 165,000 for Mcain Keating Five. 4400 hits in the last month for Obama Lies and 2900 for McCain Lies.

Originally posted by Dronetek

Originally posted by Krieger
So, everyone except the Neocon knows and understands Obama is covered more but that coverage is dominantly NEGATIVE! While McCain is left untouched.

Nobody with half a brain is going to believe that most Obama coverage is negative. It goes against everything we see from day to day. In fact, I cant remember the last negative report against Obama outside of Fox News.

So you believe that what you believe you see holds more basis in reality than what is actually being reported. Poll after poll has been shown to you(even your own) and proven you wrong. I know you feel like you see only positive for Obama and Negative for McCain but that is incorrect. Should I take these statements of yours to mean that when discussing things with you we should only rely on what we see and not what research and science and statistics show us. All of our future discussions should rely on belief only and then we can go back and forth with "I believe this", "No, you're wrong because I believe that" and we can all completely disregard evidence to the contrary because our belief is more proof than studies and research could ever show us.

This sounds like a great way to have discussions, now I can always be right and so can you because I can keep 'believing' that you are wrong and you can keep 'believing' that you are right. This method should really help to evolve culture towards a higher level of existence. With hope, maybe one day we can base our laws on this method of thinking.

reply to post by iamcamouflage


You must have missed the studies I posted. Why don't you read the thread before you post?

Not to mention, there are several recent polls showing public sick of pro Obama media bias. Also, quite a few recent studies that show a clear left wing bias. Shall I post them all for you again?

Originally posted by Dronetek
reply to post by iamcamouflage

 

You must have missed the studies I posted. Why don't you read the thread before you post?

Not to mention, there are several recent polls showing public sick of pro Obama media bias. Also, quite a few recent studies that show a clear left wing bias. Shall I post them all for you again?

No, I've read them. Are you refering to the one that was shown to argue against your point, as shown by Multiple Junkie or the one that was dated May 29th? Or your proof that you found two articles that are pro Obama.

Your Pew Research only shows that Obama received more media attention but doesnt show whether it is positive or negative. And your article from people-press.org doesnt even list Obama or McCain by name.

Not to mention that at several times in this thread you have acknowledged the other polls and research showing you are incorrect but you continue to stick to what you 'see' and 'believe'. You even jumped on Benevolent before realizing that the article posted was post primary. And then you try to come up with some other reason why you are right, claiming the results fly in the face of what you see(not evidence).

You're right, my mistake. That still doesn't explain how those results seem to fly in the face of what I see with my own two eyes. Not to mention other studies done that show a huge deficit in positive coverage of McCain. One of which I posted and has been ignored by you and the others.

Your articles only show that Obama receives more media attention. Others have posted links to show that he does in fact receive more attention but it is not more positive attention. The one article you posted that shows he receives more positive media coverage is from May 29th 2008, long before the primaries ended.

reply to post by Dronetek

Not to mention, there are several recent polls showing public sick of pro Obama media bias. Also, quite a few recent studies that show a clear left wing bias. Shall I post them all for you again?

Please post links showing that the public is sick of 'pro' Obama media bias. I think you are being misleading and trying to frame the poll to suit your claims that he gets more positive media attention. I have only heard of the polls claiming that people are tired of hearing about Obama period. Not sick of 'pro' Obama media bias.

Is this the poll: Pew Study

Yes, could you please post the polls about the left wing media bias.

[edit on 21-8-2008 by iamcamouflage]

reply to post by iamcamouflage


On my way to NYC for the weekend, so I gotta make this quick!

www.rasmussenreports.com...< br />

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that 55% believe media bias is more of a problem than big campaign contributions. Thirty-six percent (36%) disagree and think that campaign cash is a bigger problem.

People believe media bias is a bigger problem even though 63% believe most politicians will break the rules to help campaign contributors. Just 14% believe most politicians would refrain from breaking the rules for a donor. Forty-four percent (44%) say that lobbyists and campaign contributors have too much influence on John McCain’s positions. Forty percent (40%) say the same about Barack Obama.

An earlier survey found that 49% believe most reporters are trying to help Barack Obama win the election this year. Just 14% believe they’re trying to help McCain. Another survey found that the news you watch says a lot about how you will vote.

reply to post by Dronetek


Again you are failing to prove your point. The poll you site states that 49% 'believe' that the media is trying to help obama, but again the research shows something completely different. People believing that Obama is getting a break is trumped by actual research and data that shows he is not.

And the first part you site doesnt even claim what you are trying to prove. It merely states that people believe that there is media bias in general, not who they are bias for or against. Nothing in the links you have provide do anything to help support your claim.

Nice try though.