Comments on: Is Obama Getting Too Much Coverage?

Critics Charge Media Has Been Unbalanced In Race Between McCain, Obama

[obama8years]

You will never see the day when a Republican gets the kind of treatment that Obama gets. As a principle, the media agressively protects freedom of speech and freedom of the press. But that does not translate into what they actually publish. A liberal bias in the media certainly isn''''t new. And that should come as no surprise. The media''''s personal interests are better served by Democrats than Republicans. However, the bias has become much more pronounced during recent years. I really don''''t think the media cares if their liberal bias is apparent. Like politicians, their target population are the sheep amongst us, who believe everything they see or read; people who''''s minds are easily molded. Still, I think most Americans see the media it for what it is. Interesting to note that with three months to go, the race is almost a dead heat....even with the grossly slanted reporting. That would seem to indicate that a lot of Americans are resisting biased coverage and thinking for themselves. And that''''s a good thing!!
---------------------------------------
Yes it is

[obama8years]

And he said 57 stops, not 57 states

no, your wrong he said states.

[obama8years]

obama isnt getting enough!!! we need him to slip again calling americans typical white people.

[alanrobisch]

I read the philadelphia inquirer. Its headline on sunday was about 1/2 page about obama. its editorial page had 5 pro obama articles. Yeah I think the coverage is out of balance and if you actually do some research for a party who is in disarray its presidential candidate trails by 2 % in the Gallup Poll. IMHO john mccain is trusted even if the republicans aren''t at the present time

[deacon20081]

If coverage is slanted, and the Democratic candidate is recieving more interest, doing so only plays to the popular opinions of their readers and listeners.
The Republican party has lost it''s credibility, no matter how much advertising money they spend.

[a1106foothil]

You will never see the day when a Republican gets the kind of treatment that Obama gets. As a principle, the media agressively protects freedom of speech and freedom of the press. But that does not translate into what they actually publish. A liberal bias in the media certainly isn''t new. And that should come as no surprise. The media''s personal interests are better served by Democrats than Republicans. However, the bias has become much more pronounced during recent years. I really don''t think the media cares if their liberal bias is apparent. Like politicians, their target population are the sheep amongst us, who believe everything they see or read; people who''s minds are easily molded. Still, I think most Americans see the media it for what it is. Interesting to note that with three months to go, the race is almost a dead heat....even with the grossly slanted reporting. That would seem to indicate that a lot of Americans are resisting biased coverage and thinking for themselves. And that''s a good thing!!

[element51]

baborn...Your post is absurd. Afirmative action has nothing to do with being elected to a political seat. And he said 57 stops, not 57 states. And exactly how long did Bush, Clinton or Reagan serve in the House or Senate before they were elected? And since when did the "liberal press" start getting to vote in the House or Senate? However, I do believe you are right on one point. There are no doubt terrorist out there somewhere and we will hear from them again. One good reason to strengthen our ports and borders. Obama will do that because he knows that the threat is real. He will pay attention during his security briefings.

[element51]

Ariel133....There you go again. Take a moment and compare the educational backgrounds of Obama and McCain. McCain...895 out of 899 of his class. That''s it, he has nothing else. Obama....Honors graduate from Harvard Law School..editor of Harvard Law review. And you''re trying to tell us McCain is a superior intellect? Sorry, but I''m not drinking that Kool Aid. And I don''t believe that Obama spent 20 years hating America. That is nothing more than empty rhetoric that you cons are trying to pass off.

[element51]

Concerning press coverage and McCain. It was recently reported that reporters on McCain''s airplane were rewarded for "good" stories about McCain by being seated in the same section as McCain with intimate access to the Senator. Those who do not produce flattering stories are not allowed to get close to McCain. That says a lot about the media. They don''t call them media hors for nothing.

[element51]

Why does the press continue to refer to McCain as a "war hero"? Yes, he was shot down and was a prisoner of war but there were countless others who suffered the same fate or much worse. I''m not saying that McCain doesn''t deserve credit for what he went through but he does not qualify as a "hero". Recently there was a story about a soldier who threw himself on a live grenade to save his fellow soldiers. That''s a hero. And as to media coverage, it may be that Obama is just more interesting than McCain. I didn''t hear any complaining when most of the stories about Obama were negative. So why, all of a sudden, is there such an outcry about Obama getting to much coverage?

[hasher47]

I think Obama should get more coverage. He''s relatively unknown to most Americans. Crisps, some people still think he''s a Muslim.

McCain story has been told and retold a hundred times. I think it''s only fair to the lesser known guy to get better coverage.

[libh8er]

The better man with better ideas deserves more coverage! Posted by carolc241 at 03:01 PM : Jul 21, 2008

So then, why is the press ignoring McCain?

[libh8er]

''Is Obama Getting Too Much Coverage?''

It should read, ''Is Obama getting too much leftwing BIASED coverage?'' The answer would be - YES!

In the LAMEstream media''s eyes, Obama (the baby Jesus) can do no wrong. That''s why no one really cares what the media says anymore. They have lost their objectivity and credibility.

[rirose1]

Let''s stop the madness - the Obama madness - instead check out some background information -
Like Boston Globes - "Grime Proving Ground for Obama''s Housing Policy"
and research "Obma, Rezko and the Iraq Power Plants"
and "Obama''s history as chairman of the US Senate
Foreign Relations Subcommittee on European Affairs"
supposedly to oversee NATO involvement in Afganistan -appointed chairman in early 2007 he has not held one meeting on the subject of Afganistan.
These are just some of the MINOR details on the character of the man.
It is not that there is too much coverage - it is not the full coverage explaining all his baggage.

[carolc241]

The better man with better ideas deserves more coverage!

[bladdy10]

I think Jesse Jackson had a point about Obama being worth all the attention. What is Obama but anyone other than a Republican.

Wouldn''t it be nice if there was a presidential test for Obama? There is, go to YouTube and type ''anonbene'' into the search engine and watch
''Sen. Obama''

[danielle_mom]

24/7 until the election is not too much coverage. I am sure that someone can squeeze in another second or two.

[tscha1]

Is this piece supposed to add to your credibility as unbiased? CBS IS ONE OF THE MAIN COVERAGE GIVERS!!! Remember to towel off when you get out of the tank for Barry... you could slip and fall and as a member of the BHO Campaign team, unemployment may go up if you get hurt!

[j_mcdouglas]

Media attention is NEGATIVE attention.

Yeah.. the media isn''t focusing on McCain. That''s the liberals'' argument.

Thanks for finally proving us right Republicans.

McCain should get media focus and scrutiny. Just today he confused Iraq with Afghanistan.

Note to McCain: IRAQ DOESN''T BORDER ON PAKISTAN, GENIUS!!!!!

Yeah media... cover that. It''s definitely news.

But you won''t. Negative media attention is reserved for the Democrat... as usual... you biased clowns.

And Republicans are either dumb enough or they think America is dumb enough to fall for their talking points on media attention?

I suppose so... but liberals know better.

[j_mcdouglas]

No2Zeebas,

If that was Bush you were talking about, the FBI would have already tapped your phone.

You''re not only a nut, you''re a Treasonous worm.

Us liberals always knew you Republicans were really on Al Qaeda''s team... ever since you let the Saudis fly home after 911... ever since you guys let one slip one past the goalpoasts on 911 in the first place.

Traitors.