It costs McCain a lot to counteract the media love-fest for Obama. Someone's got to do it, and AP and NY Times sure ain't...

Funny you should say that, BaoRuiFe. Because it's a myth:

Most of the reporting from the evening news was opinion-free, but when on-air media personalities strayed, 28% of the statements about Obama were positive, while 72% was negative. In contrast, 43% of the statements about McCain were positive, while 57% was negative.

From http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/16341.html

MePod: Most of the reporting from the evening news was opinion-free, but when on-air media personalities strayed, 28% of the statements about Obama were positive, while 72% was negative. In contrast, 43% of the statements about McCain were positive, while 57% was negative.

hahahahahahah, what a load of crap, if you don't see that the media has appointed "The Chosen One" as their personal Buddha, you are blind.

knbber2: MePod: Most of the reporting from the evening news was opinion-free, but when on-air media personalities strayed, 28% of the statements about Obama were positive, while 72% was negative. In contrast, 43% of the statements about McCain were positive, while 57% was negative.

hahahahahahah, what a load of crap, if you don't see that the media has appointed "The Chosen One" as their personal Buddha, you are blind.

Nice attempt at subject change. Now, how about commenting on the subject itself?

Studies ARE liberally biased, you know. Dispassionately counting positive and negative stories one by one and then totaling them...clearly an activity meant to promote liberals into office.

The same media study showed a 3 or 4:1 disparity in time spent on Obama vs. McCain.

There is also the recent Unity '08 conference, which is a congregation of 4 journalist organizations. To quote from the coverage of the event:

When Obama walked on stage at the McCormick Center, many journalists in the audience leapt to their feet and applauded enthusiastically after being told not to do so. During a two-minute break halfway through the event, which was broadcast live on CNN, journalists ran to the stage to snap photos of Obama. . . .
Obama, who acknowledged that he needed a nap, stood up to say farewell to the audience of journalists, many of whom gave him another standing ovation.


Standing ovations from journalists, and frankly the need to admonish them not to, doesn't sound like impartiality. This is the same profession that admonished each other not to wear flag lapel pins because it connotes favoritism.

knbber2: hahahahahahah, what a load of crap, if you don't see that the media has appointed "The Chosen One" as their personal Buddha, you are blind.

damn those independent studies, with their fancy statistical analysis, getting in the way of your opinion!

BaoRuiFe: There is also the recent Unity '08 conference, which is a congregation of 4 journalist organizations. To quote from the coverage of the event:

Coverage of the event from where? What source are you using?

knbber2: hahahahahahah, what a load of crap, if you don't see that the media has appointed "The Chosen One" as their personal Buddha, you are blind.

Circular logic FTW!
p implies q, suppose p, therefore q

Running negative attack ads is typical strategy when one is behind. And its early in the head to head race.

Non issue.

knbber2: hahahahahahah, what a load of crap, if you don't see that the media has appointed "The Chosen One" as their personal Buddha, you are blind.

the "media" tells people what they want to hear.

reality bites.

BaoRuiFe

It costs McCain a lot to counteract the media love-fest for Obama. Someone's got to do it, and AP and NY Times sure ain't...

We can only hope that the courageous folks over at Fox News will step up to this tough challenge.


It isn't so much media bias as media desire for higher ratings, or, what amounts to the same thing, media need to increase profits by increasing advertising revenues.

They're merely following the same script that they've been following ever since the advertising industry took over this country: trot out the young, personable, smooth talking types and ignore those who are tongue-tied or don't have a high "Q" rating. Believe it or not, this is exactly why Bush had a ghost of a chance against Gore (in spite of his not-so-smooth-talk.)

gustakooka: Running negative attack ads is typical strategy when one is behind. And its early in the head to head race.

It is also a little early in the cycle to be trying to define your opponent rather than defining yourself. Invariably campaign's that go negative too early end up having it back fire on them after a certain period of time.

Code_Archeologist: gustakooka: Running negative attack ads is typical strategy when one is behind. And its early in the head to head race.

It is also a little early in the cycle to be trying to define your opponent rather than defining yourself. Invariably campaign's that go negative too early end up having it back fire on them after a certain period of time.

Example?

What else does McCain have to offer?

gustakooka: Example?

Hard to give an example... because there has never been a presidential campaign in the US that has gone negative this early. But the actual effectiveness of negative ads in the campaign is to stimulate GoTV activities. We are still over 3 months away from voting day. Current polling data is showing that the McCain campaign is not benefiting from increased excitement from their voters, and in fact the negative ads seem to be providing more energy to Obama's base.

bronyaur1: What else does McCain have to offer?

That's what I'm wondering. I hear little about McCain's ideas and policies (what I do hear can be typically described as "more of the same") but I do head a lot of attacks directed at Obama. It's almost as if McCain doesn't actually have any ideas of his own.

That headline isn't parallel. I should be 1/3 and 9/10 or 30% and 90%.

Uh...I guess that should actually be 33% and 90%

Guess I'm not perfect either. Dammit subby, you're contagious!

It's tough not to come out sounding negative when your entire campaign is based on "don't believe the hype".

Heh, and McCain's were 2/3 full of information. Obama's - 10% would be generous.

Source re Unity-08 was Honolulu star-tribune.

I think NY Times did cover McCain once--slung some innuendo about him and a lobbyist they claimed he had an affair with. So they do some McCain coverage.

Those wishing to see for themselves can see the standing ovation at Link (new window)

Apparantly these journalists have a consistent problem with objectivity. From usa today:

Four years ago, the enthusiastic reception that delegates gave to Democratic contender John Kerry and the polite, but more restrained, response to President Bush generated much discussion about whether the convention attendees violated the rules about objectivity that American journalists are expected to follow.

Satan_Sunburn: Heh, and McCain's were 2/3 full of information. Obama's - 10% would be generous.

Too bad 100% of the information in the McCain ad was misleading or false.

Nestea Plunge: So did you pull that out of 2/3 or 10% of your ass?

Settle down, you're sputtering...

knbber2: hahahahahahah, what a load of crap

hahahahaha, facts are for losers!!

Satan_Sunburn: Heh, and McCain's were 2/3 full of information. Obama's - 10% would be generous.

There BOTH full of promises, not information. "I'm going to do X, Y, and Z" is not information.

Britney ad?

Code_Archeologist: gustakooka: Example?

Hard to give an example... because there has never been a presidential campaign in the US that has gone negative this early. But the actual effectiveness of negative ads in the campaign is to stimulate GoTV activities. We are still over 3 months away from voting day. Current polling data is showing that the McCain campaign is not benefiting from increased excitement from their voters, and in fact the negative ads seem to be providing more energy to Obama's base.

A good example is actually in the McCain-Bush fight from... McCain dropped the Bush=Clinton line (after the black-baby ad)way too soon. He spent the rest of the campaign trying to step back from it, but the negative ad had already defined him before he defined himself

Obama is a tool.

Code_Archeologist: Too bad 100% of the information in the McCain ad was misleading or false.

Its better to provide more "facts" even if the "facts" aren't "facts" its still a good thing.

Or something.

BaoRuiFe: There is also the recent Unity '08 conference, which is a congregation of 4 journalist organizations. To quote from the coverage of the event:

It is sad that Obama actually spoke to the Unity clowns. What a waste of time.

Who gives a rat's ass about McCain postive or negative. He's not going to be president anyway.

VETTERN: Obama is a tool.

... a tool of change!

/like a screwdriver, or socket wrench

The flailing of those supporting a crappy candidate never fails to entertain me for hours.

It reminds me of charring fire ants with a magnifying glass. They scurry around, hysterical that the mound is in trouble, but they are simply outmatched.

Theaetetus: VETTERN: Obama is a tool.

... a tool of change!

/like a screwdriver, or socket wrench

Or a burglar's kit!

Seriously, though. Righties: take heed. The "Messiah" thing isn't working. It's not convincing anyone not to vote for the guy. And it makes you look like blithering mouth-breathers. On the other hand: keep at it. I generally encourage my opponent to continue any strategy that doesn't work for as long as possible.

knbber2:

hahahahahahah, what a load of crap, if you don't see that the media has appointed "The Chosen One" as their personal Buddha, you are blind.

How can something personal be for a group?

Hint: the root word of personal is person singular.

gustakooka: Running negative attack ads is typical strategy when one is behind. And its early in the head to head race.

Non issue.

So what do you think about McCain pledging to run a civil campaign and then not running one, also known as lying.

I don't hear Dems biatching about having to counter Rush and the Faux news gang? That bullshiat has been going on for 8 years.

You listen to your douche bags. I will listen to my douche bags. Then we can vote and you can biatch and cry and whine into your corn flakes because your guy didnt win.

People are tired of the mean, negative, racist, grandstanding bullshiat. The GOP has become the god damn Jerry Springer of global politics and people are finally getting sick of it.

TheNewJesus: The GOP has become the god damn Jerry Springer of global politics and people are finally getting sick of it.

THIS

Shrugging Atlas: Good luck finding a neocon on Fark with an account creation date older than a couple of months ago. They have gotten hip to the fact that the old ones lose all credibility very quickly once they try to participate in debates.

The Dreaded Rear Admiral: Theaetetus: VETTERN: Obama is a tool.

... a tool of change!

/like a screwdriver, or socket wrench

Or a burglar's kit!

Seriously, though. Righties: take heed. The "Messiah" thing isn't working. It's not convincing anyone not to vote for the guy. And it makes you look like blithering mouth-breathers. On the other hand: keep at it. I generally encourage my opponent to continue any strategy that doesn't work for as long as possible.

In fact, it might be working to Obama's advantage. So I'm going to ask you to do something, [f]right[ened] wing. I want you to do it every day, and I want you to aim it at poorly-educated people that soak it up.

You know where they are...



...I want you to say "Obama" and "Messiah" in the same sentence as often as possible to them. And don't think of an elephant.

/George Lakoff FTW.

The reason they call it the "high road"...
Is because it LEADS off a CLIFF!

degreeless



Shut...
The phuque...
Up!

Daddakamabb

I take offense at that!

If the truth is "negative", so be it. Quit crying Obamanuts.

MilesTeg: If the truth is "negative", so be it. Quit crying Obamanuts.

What truth?

C-Span was just reporting that the McCain camp created 2 ads related to Obama's tour abroud. One that criticizes him for not seeing the wounded troops in Germany (the one that ran), and one that criticizes him for using wounded troops in Germany as props (did not run on the air).

I'm starting to like this guy McCain. Not in a presidential manner, but more of a "he can push out a grumpy in his pants but not give a fark" kind of way.

Mighty Taternuts: MilesTeg: If the truth is "negative", so be it. Quit crying Obamanuts.

What truth?

The truth that Camp McCain is flailing around in an attempt to get something to stick to their opponent because they have nothing good to say about thier candidate.

Hideously Gigantic Smurf: degreeless



Shut...
The phuque...
Up!

Jewsus Camp is available in its entirity on YouTube, split into 9 parts.

Starting here.