It is becoming increasing clear that the public is more aware of the media’s bias towards Sen. Obama.
The questions now become:
- When will the media understand that they will be losing even more of their viewers to the internet?
- When will the media do a little soul searching about the media’s role in reporting the news? Just a hint to today’s reporters. You are supposed to investigate and report the facts in a fair and unbiased manner.
- Which reporter will break ranks and finally start reporting on negative issues that relate to Sen. Obama?
As can be seen from Rasmussen Reports poll, the belief that reporters are trying to help Obama is increasing. Many talk about the Blue Wall of Silence when the police close ranks to protect one of their own, -how is this any different? The silent conspiracy to shape the news and elect the media’s choice is becoming more visible. I hope I am not alone in my concern over this type behavior. A Free Press is one of the cornerstones of our democracy and to have it corrupted like this is just not acceptable.
Rasmussen’s analysis also points out another interesting fact. The poll indicates that 45% say that most reporters would hide information if it hurt the candidate they wanted to win. This is where Larry Sinclair’s allegation that he and Sen. Obama did cocaine and engaged in gay sex in 1999 comes into this story. Where has the media been? Why haven’t they asked any questions, investigated or interviewed Mr. Sinclair? It is my belief that the answer relates to what 45% of us believe about the media. They are hiding it to protect Senator Obama. So what will be the impact on the media? I believe it will be the straw that breaks any illusion of media objectivity that remains into a thousand pieces. This story has many layers and news stories that are being ignored – from the basic allegations, the cover-up, internet intimidation, forced blog removals, threats, and abuse of judicial process. Once this story does break, and it will, the public will be forced to look squarely at the media and ask: Where were you in all this?
The poll results are personally encouraging regarding the aspect of the story breaking. They indicate that Republicans and unaffiliated voters are more likely to trust campaign information from family and friends than from reporters. Democrats are evenly divided as to who they would trust more. Who are the bloggers? They are family and friends of course. That is how Mr. Sinclair’s story will get out. The story reaches many people each day and some of those cut and paste and send it to their friends, and so on, and so on. Therefore, it is imperative that internet bloggers continue to hold the media’s torch as best we can (without formal training), spreading the bits and pieces of news items that we find. At least until the media is shamed into doing their own jobs. Unfortunately, I’m afraid that most reporters are so full of themselves that shame will not even make a blip on their radar.
Just consider the difference in the media’s coverage of Sen. McCain’s trip to the Middle East as compared to fawning coverage Sen. Obama is receiving. We need to demand better from the press.
Maybe, just maybe, if the public gets so fed up with this attempt to fix the election that voters pull the lever for the underdog who does not garner such powerful support – then maybe they will come back to their senses.
The following poll analysis is from Rasmussen Reports
The belief that reporters are trying to help Barack Obama win the fall campaign has grown by five percentage points over the past month. The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey found that 49% of voters believe most reporters will try to help Obama with their coverage, up from 44% a month ago.
Just 14% believe most reporters will try to help John McCain win, little changed from 13% a month ago. Just one voter in four (24%) believes that most reporters will try to offer unbiased coverage.
A plurality of Democrats—37%– say most reporters try to offer unbiased coverage of the campaign. Twenty-seven percent (27%) believe most reporters are trying to help Obama and 21% in Obama’s party think reporters are trying to help McCain.
Among Republicans, 78% believe reporters are trying to help Obama and 10% see most offering unbiased coverage.
As for unaffiliated voters, 50% see a pro-Obama bias and 21% see unbiased coverage. Just 12% of those not affiliated with either major party believe the reporters are trying to help McCain.
In a more general sense, 45% say that most reporters would hide information if it hurt the candidate they wanted to win. Just 30% disagree and 25% are not sure. Democrats are evenly divided as to whether a reporter would release such information while Republicans and unaffiliated voters have less confidence in the reporters.
Republicans and unaffiliated voters are more likely to trust campaign information from family and friends than from reporters. Democrats are evenly divided as to who they would trust more.
A separate survey released this morning also found that 50% of voters believe most reporters want to make the economy seem worse than it is. A plurality believes that the media has also tried to make the war in Iraq appear worse that it really is.
A survey conducted earlier this year found that 30% of voters believe having a friendly reporter is more valuable than raising a lot of campaign contributions. Twenty-nine percent (29%) believe contributions are more important and 40% are not sure.
These results are consistent with earlier surveys finding that large segments of the population believe the media is biased It is also clear that voters select their news sources in a partisan manner. During Election 2004, CNN viewers heavily favored John Kerry while Fox Fans preferred George W. Bush.