Poll: Voters agree that MSM’s propping up Obama
After constant exposure to Obamessiah imagery, happy dances, hagiographic profiles, tingling, weeping, and ogling, voters conclude that yes, yes, mainstream journalists are in the tank for Obama.
Rasmussen via Allahpundit:
Voters have little doubt as to who is benefitting from the media coverage this year—Barack Obama. Fifty-four percent (54%) say Obama has gotten the best coverage so far. Twenty-two percent (22%) say McCain has received the most favorable coverage while 14% say that Hillary got the best treatment…
Looking ahead to the fall campaign, 44% believe most reporters will try to help Obama while only 13% believe that most will try to help McCain. Twenty-four percent (24%) are optimistic enough to believe that most reporters will try to offer unbiased coverage.
Even Democrats tend to believe their candidate will receive better treatment—27% of those in Obama’s party believe most reporters will try to help him win while only 16% believe they will help McCain. A plurality of Democrats—34%–believe most reporters will be unbiased.
Among unaffiliated voters, 44% believe reporters will try to help Obama and 14% believe they will try to help McCain.
Well, duh.
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Trackbacks
- PAXALLES
- Can the Media Win in November? | The Hinge Of Fate
- Bloodthirsty Liberal » PUMAs Roar
- The Radio Patriot
- Obama Messiah to MSM: « Riggword Weblog
- TIME Mag Reporter: Trinity Is Your Typical Black Church : BigMouthFrog
- Tel-Chai Nation
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Categories: Barack Obama
Pundit & Pundette
» Guess what? Hasan frequented strip club
Legal Insurrection
» Pelosi's Abortion Land Mine ExplodesStop The ACLU
» Hasan Tried To Contact al Qaeda. Sounds Like A Jihadi To MeJustOneMinute
» Stay Classy, Ezra!Gay Patriot
» First Shots of a Civil War Among Democrats?
Dakine:
Very good points. I do believe that MSNBC appears extremely liberal, but you make very good points about what sells and what the public will salivate after. However, I think the MSM is pretty liberal, not MSNBC liberal, but slightly left in their coverage of the War, and the Bush Whitehouse. However, perhaps that is because the media serves a cynical role and questions the the agenda and policies of people in power. You are very correct that the MSM gave a great deal of coverage to the poor aspects of Obama and Bill Clinton, namely their respective past and scandals.
Indeed, next we’ll see Red State Skeptic posting links from Planned Parenthood on the horrors of abortion. /sarc
When you are evaluating a network for bias in its “news” coverage, you cannot include talkshows, like Hannity & Colmes, The O’Reilly Factor, etc.
Look at the link to that study I put up before, again. It points out, specifically, Special Report with Brit Hume and, even more specifically, the first 30 minutes of that “news” show being used in the study, because the last 30 of it is inclined toward the input of political pundits. Fox has commentary/talkshows, as well as hard news segments.
Now, in all fairness, I have been rather put off with Fox, as of late. But, they are far closer to being “fair and balanced” than any other network out there.
Now, as to why Alan Colmes doesn’t have his own show on the weekends, like Hannity, could be because he doesn’t resonate that well with the audience. Fox is in the business of making money and, if they can’t draw the audience share with Alan Colmes on a show of his own, they can’t sell the air time for commercials and, without that, they don’t make money. But, hey, Geraldo got his own show, as revolting as it is, on Fox. There may be hope for Alan yet.
Exactly, Mr.P, but both Hillary and McCain are to the right of Obama. Hillary was the preferred candidate of FoxNews in the democratic primary, and McCain would be the favored candidate over Obama or Hillary. FoxNews TV isn’t conservative like Talk Radio, but they lean to the right,and are more pro-republican than simply pro-conservative ideology.
Wrong again, fox news leans 3 centimeters to the left, you’re just too much of an angry lib top realize it. You obviously don’t listen to any true conservative commentary or else you wouldn’t say anything like this. Bill O’Reilly himself wanders over that center line from time to time.
Now, I might have to agree with you, at least in some regard there. You danged sure can’t lump the Republican Party of today with Conservatives, on Fox or anywhere else.
Greta. Your welcome. Here’s their prime time line-up:
Shepard Smith – Lib who stays pretty balanced(a little looser at 4:00), as long as he isn’t doing live hurricane broadcasts.
O’reilly – Independent who leans right, but definitely has some left-leaning opinions too.
Hannity and Colmes – One lib, one conservative. Hello?
Greta – lib, but fair.
If your argument is that Fox doesn’t have a show hosted by a kool aid drinking lib who is completely detached from reality, kudos, because you’re right. Why would they?
It could also be because he doesn’t want one. He has a daily radio show in addition to Hannity and Colmes. I know some will find it hard to believe, but maybe he is already working all he wants.
Haha, I knew the media matters thing would lose you! But unlike Fox, Media Matters never pretends to be fair and balanced. Their admitted mission is to highlight examples of misinformation in the news that benefits conservatives.
But by your own approach, think of the connections that Roger Ailes has had: Nixon, Reagan, Bush 43, Giuliani! Is that disingenuous?
(anyway, here’s the link again. Consider the content.)
http://mediamatters.org/items/200407140002
Yeah sure… That must be why the “msm” stay distinctly to left, even though they have consistently lost market share…
Hal Turner? That you had to reach so far into obscurity to find a right wing loon to counter media darlings like Shabazz and Code Pink should answer your question.
Then that means we left the realm of ignorance and jumped right on over to stupid, if you knew it is a blatantly liberal propoganda machine and you choose to use it anyhow as a basis for your argument.
dakine said:
Tell that to the New York Times
At one time NYT was $80 per share and has recently hit a low of $14/share. You really think they care about ad revenue?
Mistress idiot said:
Television viewing just hit an all time low, meaning since the inception of the television!
I really think you two like to rattle stuff off to sound ‘intelligent’.
If anybody doubts the Obama suck up by the MSM, just check out the Good Morning America report on the 40th anniversity of RFK’s assassination. The end of the report showed a terribly sad photo of Bobby Kennedy’s life ebbing away and then the screen morphed into a photo of Barack Obama. It was truly sickening. The juxtoposition of the RFK and Obama photos was telling us that in Barack Obama we are seeing the resurrection of Robert F. Kennedy. And the ABC reporter pretty much stated the same thing. If you vote against Obama, you are denying the resurrection of Robert F. Kennedy.
And of course anybody who knows anything about Robert F. Kennedy knows how profoundly different his views were from Barack Obama’s views. The text of RFK’s last campaign debate in the 1968 campaign is still available in the NY Times archives. His views were strikingly different from the pablum of Barack Obama. Not that anybody at ABC News would ever bother to read the text.
When even Obama’s vaunted “speaker savvy” is a lie, one wonders why he has the media panting for him!
Leno and Letterman follow big media in ignoring Obama’s uhms, ahhs, and lack of knowledge on issues. Yet they continue to make jokes about GWB. Jokes that perpetrate their bias, with very little or no connection to reality.
Obama’s speech in Bristol, VA is an embarrassment! Perhaps YouTube will feature that portion where he struggled to formulate a sentence making the excuse that “he couldn’t hear himself” after several incoherent tries.
He is not sharp on his feet. He leans heavily on speechwriters! There goes the ivy-league advantage of the Democratic Party candidate. He cannot extricate himself from a wet paper bag!
On June 9th, 2008 at 9:58 am,
“The Potemkin Candidate” is what comes to my mind.
Obama’s last debate performance against Hillary showed where his Achilles’ Heel is: get him off-script, and he starts “winging it.” But when The King of Wing has no base of knowledge or experience upon which to build his arguments, they collapse like a house of cards in a stiff breeze.
No wonder he refused to debate her again after that.
Obama’s litter-carriers in the media can only take him so far; look to the debates, when he’ll be exposed live with no editors and reporters to come to his rescue, to see him stumble and fall.
“Look, mommy! The Emperor has no clothes!”
- Epitaph of Senator Hopenchange’s 2008 run for the White House.
That truly is an Obamination! Glad I didn’t watch and haven’t seen a rerun of the juxtaposition!
That’s true everywhere I go. It isn’t media bias that makes them appear so wacked out, it’s the foolish liberal policies they espouse.
I would like to see Chris Matthews Photo-shopped into a Borg caricature as Chief ‘Giddy’ Obamabot.
The media has been doing this for years. This, however, is the most obvious that they have ever been. I think that “fair and balanced” just went out the window.
I thought Pravda was corrupt back in the days of the Soviet Union, but the media in America is much worse today. At least you knew where Pravda was coming from. Too many people in this country believe the media are fair and they are not. This is truely a national disgrace and McCain is finally about to find this out. I cannot even watch any news anymore (even Fox) as I get so upset and irate I fell like blowing my top (or stuffing Wolf, the Bolshevik, Blitzer into a grave while he is still alive.
Shepard Smith is not a liberal. I’m not sure how liberal Greta is, but her show focuses on crime rather than politics.
You have to be kidding me about Hannity and Colmes. It’s Hannity’s show, and he chooses the themes and agenda.
FoxNews and MSNBC are two sides of the same coin.
Hal Turner is much more well known than Shabazz. Who the hell thinks about the New Black Panther Party anymore. Do a google search, and see how often Shabazz appeared on Fox News last year. He’s a darling of that network, and no other. He’s known, because Fox News makes sure he’s known. Hal Turner has been showcased on CNN, and has been contacted by the FBI for threats against judges. Fox News won’t touch him because he’s a right-winger.
Two sides of the same coin, I tell you.
AJ:
I big time agree with you here. I just want to add one more thing to those who think that the “big corporate media machine” is being given too much credit. We all, I don’t care who you are, inherently have some kind of bias. It’s pretty sad when it’s clearly visible for the world to see. When even Dems see it, you know there’s an issue.
I think those who aren’t so hung up on politicians and Obummer in particular want the presidential campaign covered fairly, worts and all. Any poster here who suggests that the media aren’t playing a role in the campaign are either in denial, or just plain liars.
Yeah, AJ, this poll is a big DUH HUH from me too.
mistressjustice, lenin was to the right of obama. So was mao.
I certainly agree it’s their wacked out policies and beliefs. My question is why do O’Reilly and Hannity enjoy showcasing the left-wing loons, but never the ones on the right? Any honest conservative will concede that there are fringe groups on the far-right with whom they strongly disagree, and are poor role models. Why aren’t these a-holes ever on FoxNews? Because they like exploiting the left-wing crackpots to poke fun at the left. They won’t touch the radical extreme right, because they don’t want these people associated with the right side of the aisle.
I read some quote from a white supremacist leader who said that Obama won’t make it to the Whitehouse, because somebody in the south “will take care of him”.
Interview this wack-job, hate agent, FoxNews.
Yeah, I know, it’s your network, and you’ll do what you wanna.
Mistress Just-ice said:
Do you even know that that Shabazz prick was kicked off the show because he was called Michelle Malkin a ‘lady of the night’ (to use the less pejorative term)? Do you even realize that? That bag of sh*t hasn’t been on since last August maybe. Get a clue will ya. Quit smokin’ the alligator skin.
The TV in our office lobby is usually parked on CNN…(it’s not MY choice, I work upstairs). But why is it ’bout every time I walk through there, on the way back to the breakroom for lunch, I pass that TV and see Obama making a live speech?
It’s EVERY DAY! And usually around noon. Him lately, but before, it was the Hillary show… Hillary walkin’ talkin’, Hillary waving, pointing, laughing, drinking, and I’ve NEVER seen a McCain speech EVER! Only sound bites from him. Or just a clip of him, then being picked apart by some talking head I’ve never seen or heard from before.
Daytime TV must now be nothing but OBAMAVISION now. “Everything Obama, all the time”
How did that Dire Straights song go…
“57 channels and nothing on…”
Hannity Denies Past Association With White Supremacist But Evidence Suggests Otherwise
Reported by Ellen – March 20, 2008 – 457 comments
Another night, another high tech lynching of Barack Obama on Hannity & Colmes. It was the usual attacks on Obama over those with whom he associates. But last night (3/19/08), Sean Hannity was confronted about his own past association with white supremacist Hal Turner. First Hannity denied knowing Turner, then he said he had long ago banned Turner from his show. While it’s probably true that Hannity banned Turner, what Hannity didn’t mention is that before Turner got banned, he was regularly welcomed on Hannity’s show, even after saying on the air that if it weren’t for the graciousness of white people, “black people would still be swinging on trees in Africa.” Updated with video.
Malik Shabazz, of the New Black Panther Party, was the guest. FOX News frequently hosts members of that organization, usually as objects of derision. Last night, Shabazz was there because his organization had endorsed Barack Obama. It was an endorsement that Obama specifically rejected but FOX News deliberately trumped up the endorsement by inviting Shabazz on the program (See, look what kind of extremists Obama associates with), playing a clip from one of Shabazz’ more incendiary confrontations with Hannity (Jews knew about 9/11 and got out of the way), and repeatedly running the “news” on the crawl that the Obama campaign had rejected the endorsement because the New Black Panther Party is considered to be an organization that advocates violence.
But last night, Shabazz wisely toned down his rhetoric and confronted Hannity on his own bias against Obama. “Why won’t you acknowledge the brilliance of Barack Obama’s speech? Why won’t you accept his call to come out of the divisive throngs of racism?” Shabazz asked.
They are afraid. They will be called “racist” to the skies if they dare say a word against the Obamessiah.
Ellen? Ellen who? DeGeneres?
Another reason is the nutjobs are the exception on the right, on the left they’re the rule.
You may be interested in knowing that it took a long time for me to start watching Fox. I stuck with CNN for a long time and it was there that my low opinion of liberal commentators was formed. Debates between liberals and conservatives on whatever network tend to follow the same pattern, with the conservative trying to calmly lay out a reasoned opinion and the liberal rudely interupting and trying to shout the other person down. That kind of behavior is not very becoming no matter where it’s done.
I might also point out the example of Sen. Chris Dodd, who appeared on the Factor and kept repeating the same talking points even though he was obviously losing the debate. Within five minutes he was proclaiming on his website and on DKos that he had taken it to O’Reilly. Yeah, right.
Your assertion that Fox is single-handedly making making liberals look bad by their choice of guests doesn’t wash. The liberal commentators do that all by themselves everywhere they go.
I’m not saying FoxNews is single-handedly doing this. People like Code Pink and Shabazz are natuarally asinine, no matter the forum. My POINT is that FoxNews shows these left-wing loons, and NEVER loons from the right. I’m sure you’ll agree that there are loons on the right. Well, FoxNews won’t put them on their flagship shows. That’s all I’m saying.
Lastly, liberal commentators are people like Mark Lamont Hill, Kirsten Powers, Juan Williams, and Jane Hall.
People like Code Pink and the New Black Party represent the fringe, just as Hal Turner, the Aryan Nation and the Klan represent the fringe. FoxNews just makes a calculated decision to never showcase the right-wing fringe.
Neo Nazi/White Supremacist Hal Turner Confirms Friendship And Kinship With Sean Hannity
Reported by Ellen – March 23, 2008 – 345 comments
Earlier in the week, Sean Hannity denied, albeit in contradictory terms, ever having a relationship with neo Nazi/white supremacist Hal Turner. As I posted the night Hannity was confronted about Turner, the evidence conflicts with Hanniy’s claims. Now Turner has confirmed their friendship and their sympatico views in a blog post called, “About Sean Hannity and Me. . . . . Yes, we were friends and yes, Sean agreed with some of my views.” H/T Davefromqueens.
UPDATED: Comments received from someone claiming to be Hannity’s Program Director
In his post (Warning: not for the faint of heart) that reveals just what kind of guy he is, Turner writes:
In my opinion, based on my first hand experience, I believe Sean Hannity is, in fact, a Hal Turner sort of guy. It seems to me that a big difference between Sean and me is that I am willing to say publicly what I think about savage Black criminals, diseased, uneducated illegal aliens and the grotesque cultural destruction wrought by satanic jews while Sean and many others keep quiet to protect their paychecks.
We have cited many times an article in The Nation as evidence that Turner and Hannity were palsy. In his post, Turner calls the author, Max Blumenthal, a “douche bag sodomite,” but Blumenthal’s account is essentially confirmed by Turner’s:
I was quite disappointed when Sean Hannity at first tried to say he didn’t know me and then went on to say that I ran some senate campaign in New Jersey. In fact, Sean Hannity does know me and we were quite friendly a number of years ago.
…When Hannity took over Bob Grant’s spot on 77 WABC in New York City, I was a well-known, regular and welcome caller to his show. Through those calls, Sean and I got to know each other a bit and at some point, I can’t remember exactly when, Sean gave me the secret “Guest call-in number” at WABC so that my calls could always get on the air.
When I utlized that call-in number, Sean would very often come onto that line during commercial breaks so we could chat before I went on the air. Our off-the-air chats grew to an exchange of other phone numbers, me giving Sean my home and cellular number and Sean giving me his direct dial-in number at Fox News channel.
In 1993, My wife got pregnant and around a month later, Sean reported that he and his wife were expecting their first child. We got to talking about things expectant dads talk about and the relationship grew.
…Over the course of the next three or four years, Sean and I spoke regularly off the air about our kids, politics and news of the day. My on-air calls to his show remained regular and welcome
.
Turner concludes his blog post by threatening to use “force and violence” against his enemies. “Those using me as a prop to attack Sean Hannity would do well to remember this fact. Rest assured I will remember them when the opportunity presents itself.”
Last Wednesday (3/19/08), Hannity & Colmes guest Malik Shabazz asked Hannity, in response to his continual attacks on Barack Obama regarding his pastor, “Are you to be judged by your promotion and association with Hal Turner?”
Hannity at first denied knowing Turner, then asserted that Turner was someone running a campaign in New Jersey whom Hannity had banned from his radio show. Then in what sounded like a tacit admission to me, Hannity told Shabazz, “I’m not running for president.”
Two nights later (3/21/08) on Hannity & Colmes, Hannity professed to be saddened by the racial divisiveness engendered by the controversy about Obama and his pastor. But Hannity seems to have directly participated in far more divisiveness than Obama. Please write Hannity and FOX News and demand that Hannity come clean about his own associations before he continues accusing Barack Obama about his.
mistressjustice said:
Man the ice woman has gone Reductio ad Hitlerum on us, must be a last ditch effort in a failing argument. Did you know that the nazis were actually gay liberals?
Bloviations indeed.
RWR
http://www.rightwingrocker.com
Hi MsJustice -
In all the polls over the years, the public has cited the leftwing – liberal bias of the MSM. This news is just telling folks what they’ve already known,
Not correct, MsJustice. Since it is the only video news broadcast that includes the take from the right along with the left, it only seems to some to be “strongly to the right”. People have never been exposed to such a balance before – it does seem shocking to some, especially those on the left. But most Americans – the Jane & John Doe Average folks – consistently make it number one in the ratings.
While Fox features such people from the left as Geraldo The Spitter and Susan Estrich, you find no phenom in reverse in the liberal MSM. Maybe on a Sunday Talker they’ll have the rare conservative guest set up with 4-5 talking heads (along with the “moderator”) from the left to scream down the guest. Perhaps some view that as “balance”.
OTOH, I think one of the problems we may tend to have these days is too much “news” and not digestion.
My gripes with Fox News is it’s growing tendency to PC-ness and when it follows the rest of the MSM lead in silly saturation coverage of non-events, e.g. celeb-driven “news”, 24/7 Paris Hilton escapades, etc.
Back in the day Huntley-Brinkley and the other network’s newscasters could cover the news in 15 minutes – often with a cigarette ad on the front of their desks.
You ever heard of Godwin’s law, AU-H2ONite?
Hello there Purplepeep. I think viewings of CNN and MSNBC will show liberal pundits vs. conservative pundits with a slightly left leaning moderator w/o any screaming being done by the moderator. I don’t think Scarborough and Buchanan feel too abused over at MSNBC-which is very much a mouthpiece for democrats. I do agree that Foxnews is a shocking change to us on the left:)) Have a good one.
Thanks – you too, MsJ.
I rarely watch the telly for anything, when I do watch the news channels it’s almost always online. Dumped cable years back. If the ol’ rabbit ears or PC don’t deliver it, I figure I don’t need it.
Though it’s nice to catch the local weather – sometimes the weatherguy/gal actually gets it right
Howie Carr spent the day playing a pretty hilarious recording of the great orater, Obama, completely flubbing his lines. It is worth seeking out.
Tell that to the poor souls in Connecticut, where the price is about $4.30/gal (about 30 cents higher than nearby Mass.) It is all taxes, albeit mostly state taxes. And they are due to go up after the fourth of July. Nice timing, huh? I’ll take the 18 cents/gal fed tax holiday. lgm: you can keep paying your “few cents” per gallon.
Every journey begins with but a single step. You can’t stop the boat from sinking if you don’t start bailing, no matter how small the cup. And since when is the MSM the fount of all knowledge economic?
I wish. If the MSM is reporting this, they are doing so only to poison the well of hispanic support for McCain. It is false.
But Obambi is good?
If you want proof of MSM bias and complicity in manipulating elections, you need look no further than the Bush/TANG and Kerry/Swiftboat reporting. I have some really nice timelines if you need proof.
And then there is Bernie Goldberg…
That 13% who STATE most reporters will support McCain are lying. And the 56% who did NOT state most reporters would support Obama are divided into three catagories:
Liars
Fools/Unconscious
Lying Unconscious Fools
And of course Chris Matthews, the leg thing
The real question is: why would anyone who loves this country support McCain?
Don’t blame me. I voted for Fred.