Odds this study gets the coverage that "OMG! Are we covering Obama too much and too positively!" did?

100,000-to-1

I didn't need a study to tell me that.

Thing is... these days, conservatives seem to be trying to playing pretty fast and loose with reality. Hell, most of the time it doesn't seem like they even care what really happened, they just want to talk about what they wished happened and then seem to pretend that it actually happened the way they wished it regardless of weather or not they might be looking right at something proving them wrong about it.

It very well be some of the heaviest willful ignorance I've experienced since people called me unpatriotic for not wanting us to go to war with Iraq.

anyone who has said Obama gets of easy and McCain has it bad was/is either flat out lying or they are stupid.

I vote stupid.

JohnnyC: conservatives seem to be trying to playing pretty fast and loose with reality

That smell you smell is the odor of desperation.

I vote lying.

Its anything they can do to help, even if it just helps the tiniest fraction, keep them democrats out of office.

Yesdog: That smell you smell is the odor of desperation.

Yeah, I know.

Okay folks... I'm off to go do some early morning battling in Call of Duty 4. Enjoy your mornings and I might see ya later before I go back to bed. :)

JohnnyC: these days, conservatives seem to be trying to playing pretty fast and loose with reality.

"These days", sadly, have been going on for nearly a decade. This whole "vast left-wing conspiracy / liberal media bias" claim has been a rallying cry for the Republican party for as long as I can remember. And I'm sure both parties have been doing this nonsense for far longer, but our current iteration of this neocon-driven fantasyland seems to have kicked off about ten years ago.

I only point this out because I didn't really realize it myself until I read your comment.

The Audacity of Hype!

floor9: our current iteration of this neocon-driven fantasyland seems to have kicked off about ten years ago.

It's way older than that. The conservatives began screaming about the Fairness Doctrine in the 80's.

The Obvious tag must still be napping.

NYZooMan: The Audacity of Hype!

I take that you didn't read the article, the article's headline, or even the latter half of the Fark headline.

But hey, that pun on the title of Obama's book never gets old.

Yep, the media can't stand McCain (Youtube).

Warning: Cringe worthy editing and soundtrack.

Republicans cry foul play anytime Obama gets ANY positive mention.

But then again, their candidate is a corrupt, senile, untrustworthy, elitist, ignorant idiot, who can't be trusted to sit right on a toilet seat, so it probably stands to reason they expect the media to work harder for them to get him elected. I mean, that's only fair, and how democracy works, right? Right?

floor9: I only point this out because I didn't really realize it myself until I read your comment.

I completely agree on your timetable of about 10 years or so. I think it might even go further back than that.

When I said, "these days", I was more talking about how it has been ramping up to a fever pitch. I think the primary reason is that it scares the crap out of them that the Democrats have put up a candidate that a lot of people genuinely like. That is the main thing you hear so much from the Obama's opposition, that he is too popular, that people like him too much. Of course they exaggerate the reality of that and use terms like "messiah" and all that sort of nonsense.

I know part of it is just simple jealousy. I think many of them really wish they had a candidate they liked. John McCain just isn't filling those shoes at all. So when they see Democratic supporters excited, they call that excitement by derogatory names or try to layer it with insinuation to demean it. Maybe it makes them feel better? Who knows... all I know is that as an independent (not a previously republican or democratic party member), I'm just glad to have a candidate I can vote for without it being a "lesser of two evils" kind of vote. I've had people (mostly trolls here on fark) get on my case because of that, but I know what the motivation behind those kinds of attacks is and it generally makes me feel bad for the people who feel they need to act that way.

I wish the Republicans would have put up every bit as much of a powerful and good candidate as I see Obama to be, but with their ranks thinning daily and their party so deep in the tank on their policies, I can easily see why the best they could do was to put John McCain up again. Maybe they were thinking he was the same McCain we thought we knew 8 years ago, but he isn't. He's a different man these days and not one I like or agree with. Seems I'm not the only one though, I just don't see much honest support for him, more just opposition to Obama.

Of course we'll hear the, "It's Obama's race to lose", but I don't see that happening either. I'm sure there will be much gnashing of teeth when that happens, but I suppose we'll deal with that when it does. I hope that the Republicans can pull themselves together for maybe the 2016 election. Though I think the only way they're going to do that is if they stop doing what they've been doing and start putting the people ahead of their ambitions. I'm not counting on it... it's just what I hope to see.

In other words... I hope that the 2016 election is a tough choice for me to make because both the Democratic and Republican candidates are so good that it's hard to choose. This election... it's easy for me... Obama all the way.

Who knows... Obama might end up not being as good a President as many of us think he will be, but I doubt that as well. We'll soon see (I think). :D

McCain got off the Straight talk express and started riding on the Whaaaambulance.

JohnnyC: Who knows... Obama might end up not being as good a President as many of us think he will be, but I doubt that as well. We'll soon see (I think). :D

He won't be as good as we hope, but he'll be better than we fear.

MisterBill: He won't be as good as we hope, but he'll be better than we fear.

awesome

What? Is the on vacation?

MisterBill: He won't be as good as we hope, but he'll be better than we fear.

Very well put.

MisterBill: He won't be as good as we hope, but he'll be better than we fear.

Probably a very accurate assessment. :)

Of course, the paper who printed this article, the L.A. Times, is part of the liberal media, it's no wonder they're saying that there's no such thing as a liberal bias.

gundamtsubasa: Of course, the paper who printed this article, the L.A. Times, is part of the liberal media, it's no wonder they're saying that there's no such thing as a liberal bias.

someone out there is actually going to say that.

(TFA)

During the evening news, the majority of statements from reporters and anchors on all three networks are neutral, the center found. And when network news people ventured opinions in recent weeks, 28% of the statements were positive for Obama and 72% negative.

Network reporting also tilted against McCain, but far less dramatically, with 43% of the statements positive and 57% negative, according to the Washington-based media center.

This, by the way, is downright criminal considering the incredible amount of stuff that comes through Fark, like

NBC's news director: Yes, the press did give McCain a huge pass on the Iran-Al Qaeda thing that we never would have given a Democrat (89)

Or material on youtube that tries to cover this discrepancy

This can go on and on.

Media moguls forced pro-Bush, pro-war narrative. Hey, look... there's an elephant in here (100)



Washington reporters now in full meltdown, damage control mode after Bill Moyer's biatchslap of the Washington press corps collective loss of critical thinking in 2001-2003 on Iraq (151)


The media's hysteria-driven coverage of Pelosi's Syria trip demonstrates that it takes its cues from fringe ideologues whom it mistakes for the mainstream (45)


"...how efficiently certain views that deviate from the elite consensus are banished from sight -- simply prohibited -- even when those views are held by the vast majority of citizens." (76)

suck it, TV Media

gundamtsubasa: Of course, the paper who printed this article, the L.A. Times, is part of the liberal media, it's no wonder they're saying that there's no such thing as a liberal bias.

ok let's look at the details her. what is the most liberal of the news networks? MSNBC right> Home of Olbermann and Matthews right?
Olbermann is unabashedly liberal. Matthews while being a Democrat does play it down the middle of the road most times. And I've actually seen him fawn over republicans. He has friends on both sides. SO that's 2 hours of liberal shows per day.
in the morning during drive time they have 3 hours of Scarborough
and an hour
So there's your most liberal news network right there. 3 hours of conservative vs 2 hours of liberal.
CNN has no liberals with their own shows but do have Dobbs ,Beck and Blitzer.
Fox well we know the story there.

who farking cares? Where did this conceit that commercial news was remotely interested in objectivity? They show what they think you'll tune in to watch and sit through the ads for.

Duh. Chris Mathews just spent the whole show talking about Obama's Jewish problem and his problem with whites. He dropped some shiat about his perceived Muslimness.

Only in the 'liberal idgit media' do 60% of Jews voting for you constitute a problem. And the only 'whites' that didn't vote for Obama were Appalachians and people over 65.

Farking noise. And it does Obama no favors.

If the stupid media spent a quarter of the time reporting on McCain's mindless babbling that they do talking about Obama's 'command in chief' threshold -- McCain would be polling at 20% percent along with the rest of Republicans.

But an election that isn't a 'horse race' isn't 'news worthy'.

/cue liberal media apologists

The media is supposed to be objective, not neutral. It is their fault that we have tolerated the scumsucking behavior of the Bush Administration.

More Liberal Media

...snip...
As the controversy over Jeremiah Wright conclusively demonstrated, there is a glaring double standard applied to black Ministers such as Wright (who are quickly deemed scary, extremist anti-American radicals and therefore must be banished by all decent people) and white evangelical preachers such as Hagee (who can utter the most inflammatory and contemptible trash and still be treated with the utmost respect from Serious Centrists like Lieberman). More to the point, Democrats are continuously required to "repudiate" members of the so-called "Far Left" upon pain of being deemed un-Serious, while there is no such thing as "too extreme" on the Right, and Joe Lieberman is thus free to share a stage with a crazed extremist like John Hagee and depict him as a modern-day Moses and still be considered (and, at the GOP Convention, will be hailed as) a Serious, Responsible, Honorable, Centrist by our political and media elite.
...snip... (alternative link)

threads
[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15 ][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28] [29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37][38][39][40][41][ 42][43][44][45][46][47][48][49][50][51][52][53][54][55 ][56][57][58][59][60][61][62][63][64][65][66][67][68] [69][70][71][72][73][74][75][76][77][78][79][80][81][ 82][83][84][85][86][87][88][89][90][91][92][93][94][95 ][96][97-part2][98][99][100][101][102][103][104][105][106][107][108][109] [110][111]

thats enough, really.

lol

[20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32] [33][34][35][36][37][38][39][40]
[41][42][43][44][45][46][47][48][49][50][51][52][53] [54][55][56][57][58][59][60]
[61][62][63][64][65][66][67][68][69][70][71][72][73] [74][75][76][77][78][79][80]
[81][82][83][84][85][86][87][88][89][90][91][92][93] [94][95][96][97-part2][98][99][100][101]
[102][103][104][105][106][107][108][109][110][111]

thats enough, really.

Party Boy

Thats not news, dumbass. Thats FARK.

TV Media guys..
Feel free to select from above for some McCain coverage. I know you guys have been covering the Pastor Wright Issue since 2007, but there's other stories out there.

DarnoKonrad: Chris Mathews just spent the whole show talking about Obama's Jewish problem

Hey TV media, I know how you love covering this issue



CNN: Hawkish Israel supporters concerned about Obama

But, if you could, please cover different material. Thanks.

Rethorn: Thats not news, dumbass. Thats FARK.

There's these things in those threads, called articles. Those articles have these things called issues/points covered by journalists.

Those points need to be covered by the TV media more.

Sounds reasonable:

And when network news people ventured opinions in recent weeks, 28% of the statements were positive for Obama and 72% negative.

Network reporting also tilted against McCain, but far less dramatically, with 43% of the statements positive and 57% negative, according to the Washington-based media center.
...
That was a reversal of the trend during the primaries, when the same researchers found that 64% of statements about Obama -- new to the political spotlight -- were positive, but just 43% of statements about McCain were positive.

Such reversals are nothing new in national politics, as reporters tend to warm up to newcomers, then turn increasingly critical when such candidates emerge as front-runners.

Mccain + Myth

[1][2][3] ..etc

Rethorn: Party Boy

Thats not news, dumbass. Thats FARK.

Don't be rude. He's simply walking his talk by posting citations. It's far more effective than regurgitation of lame Rushbo one-liners.

Party Boy: Mccain + Myth

[1][2][3] ..etc

Man, you're on fire today!

In other news, I'm ruining Fark.

Hung Like A Tic-Tac: Party Boy: Mccain + Myth

[1][2][3] ..etc

Man, you're on fire today!

While it's better than the usual Fox and Corkum cartoons he usually posts, a lot of the links are to either blogs or op/ed pieces. This thread is about the how the mainstream media is reporting covering the campaign, not opinion pieces or blogs.

However, please continue linking to anything that is actually reporting on McCain instead of giving him a pass like the aforementioned mainstream media. Maybe people will wake the fark up and start to realize what a dirt ball this "man of honor" has become of late.

Turn on Meet the press: Obama getting interviewed/grilled.

Interviewers need to hit all politicians this hard.

I'm shocked!
Maybe the huge corporations that own the media want a republican administration...they're so easily bought and paid for!

Tor_Eckman: a lot of the links are to either blogs or op/ed pieces. This thread is about the how the mainstream media is reporting covering the campaign, not opinion pieces or blogs.

A component of this is debunking the myth that both candidates have an equal amount of "bullshiat" that needs to be covered. If the TV media is failing to cover all of McCain's bs, then it must be established how much is there to cover. This information isn't always on CBS and CNN.

Speaking of which...Turd Blossom is on Fox news now!

lol. Brokaw just accused Obama of pandering to the Jewish vote.

yellekc: Yep, the media can't stand McCain (Youtube).

Warning: Cringe worthy editing and soundtrack.

Wow- hadn't seen that before. So Politico sent Cindy McCain FLOWERS ?!?!??!

I would love to get a guest list from that cookout- just to see who is in the tank for McCain.

With the media obviously not reporting EVERYTHING out there, I am sure that Farkers have found somewhere where the candidate's stances on issues has been laid out, including any flips, flops, or revisions. I am currently torn on who to vote for after being a lifetime Republican. Can someone help me out with a decent site that has a track record for the two candidates on the major issues that is up to date? ontheissues.org only goes up to April of this year and 4 months is a long time to revise your positions.



/Boobies out of the way
//been reading for 8 years now, never posted

I wonder how much effect these little "jabs and pokes" stories have on a persons perception of a candidate, I think people probably already formulated an opinion and then use those kind of stories to reinforce that opinion.

Yesdog:
That smell you smell is the odor of desperation.

It would be easier on them if they hadn't become moral relativists to whom winning is more important than core political principles. Add to that their deal with the religionists and suddenly they stink to high heaven

.

The_Six_Fingered_Man: Can someone help me out with a decent site that has a track record for the two candidates on the major issues that is up to date? ontheissues.org only goes up to April of this year and 4 months is a long time to revise your positions.

http://www.votesmart.org/election_president.php