« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »
Public Says Media Harder on Clinton Than Obama, McCain (Gallup)
PRINCETON, NJ -- Although Americans in general think that news media coverage of the three major presidential candidates has been "about right," they are more inclined to say the media have been "too hard" on Hillary Clinton and "too easy" on Barack Obama and John McCain.
And the Pope is Catholic.
link
Advertisement
Comments (12)
Because Bill, Hillary and her surrogates say so!
May 30, 2008 2:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
NO. The pope is a nazi.
May 30, 2008 2:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Basically, we're seeing the success of the Clinton media machine. Even from the beginning, when Clinton was still the presumed winner, the Clintons have been pushing this "woe is me" story that the media is too harsh on them. I'll give the Clinton campaign credit for knowing how to use selective perception to their advantage, but if you really think the media has been unfairly biased against the Clintons, then I have a bridge to sell you.
May 30, 2008 3:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
What's the difference? How many people say they vote the way they do because of their view of how the media treats the candidates? How many think that's how other people vote?
The obsession with the media portrayal of Clinton is bizarre. Is there any mystery as to who Mrs. Clinton is and what she stands for? Does anyone need Chris Mathews, Charlie Gibson, Andrea Mitchell or the Plain-Dealer-Post-Dispatch-Telegraph-Leader to tell them?
She has made this argument a center piece of her campaign: I am so well known, and have been attacked so viciously there is nothing that can hurt me in the election against the republicans. Except David Shuster and some shock jocks from New Hampshire apparently.
May 30, 2008 4:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
HRC - Building Cognitive Dissonance for Fun and Profit.
May 30, 2008 4:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
What makes a difference is that the Clinton campaign has been pushing this story successfully enough (even before there was the excessive coverage there now is) that the media appears to have bought it themselves. That means that, as a consequence, they try to counter it and create the very bias (but in the opposite direction) that the Clinton campaign was "complaining" about. It's a very brilliant campaign strategy of theirs, and has been very effective. I think it's one reason the contest has been as close as it has been. It's definitely a reason the media keeps pretending the contest is even closer than it is.
Don't get me wrong—the media isn't a big, single-minded conglomerate. There are some who aren't fooled by this nonsense, which the Clinton campaign then compare to those who are fooled by this nonsense to try to "prove" that it's not nonsense. Then there are also, no doubt, some that actually do have a bias, although I'm guessing this is a very small fraction of the media market.
May 30, 2008 4:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
The SNL "Can we get you something, Barack?" skit captures it perfectly.
May 30, 2008 4:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Absolutely. Although I think we're talking about two different "its".
May 30, 2008 4:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Is this the same public 30% of which believe that Mr. Bush is doing a bang-up job? That's obviously a very credible and authoritative source of information. Wisdom even.
May 30, 2008 4:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Nothing could be more obvious.
May 30, 2008 4:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
I wonder if it's the same percentage of the public that still thinks he's muslim.
May 30, 2008 7:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
It goes both ways. The media are guilty of both misogyny and Clinton bashing, but also of recycling Hillary's campaign's ridiculous spin. In both cases, they have been utterly incompetent.
May 30, 2008 7:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Post a Comment