posted on Nov, 8 2012 @ 08:53 AM
Excellent analysis of the 2012 election and the obvious, and maybe not so obvious, media manipulation (and not necessarily mass media.) How do we go
from a pretty boring couple of candidates and a seemingly foregone conclusion to a "tight race" to results that mirror the boring candidates and
I saw it here in Minnesota, a very obvious case. In a state that hadn't voted for a Republican president since Richard Nixon in 1972, and where
President Obama enjoyed a 8-10 point lead, the Minneapolis Star Tribune
published poll results in mid-October that said the lead had shrunk to
three points, a statistical tie. A lot of people, including me, immediately said "what?" but within a few days, we had all the trappings of a swing
state, with the Romney campaign (which, to that point, didn't even have a campaign office in the state) and Super PACs pouring money into media
advertising. Neither Obama nor his supporting PACs seemed to do much different.
And, when all was said and done, Obama sailed to an eight point victory over Romney in the state. The only question that remains, it seems, is
whether that apparent manipulation was in favour of boosting local media income, or to take resources away from "real" swing states.
(visit the link for the full news article)
edit on 8-11-2012 by adjensen because: oopsies