By Ross Balano, Midwest Voices Columnist 2008
As if there were any doubt before now, the three major television networks -- ABC, CBS & NBC -- are showing their total bias in favor of Barack Obama by announcing that all three of their anchor people will be with Obama on his upcoming trip to the Middle East.
Charlie Gibson, Katie Couric and Brian Williams are all slated to cover Obama’s trip first hand and interview the Democratic candidate while there.
Contrast this with the coverage given to Republican candidate John McCain on his recent travels to the region. There certainly wasn’t much fanfare from the big three then.
Democrats, who always seem to be complaining about talk radio being so conservative, seem to have no problem with the nation’s three major networks being in the tank for their candidate. Where are the senators who clamor for the “fairness doctrine” when it's their candidate who is getting what amounts to millions of dollars in free campaign ads from the networks complete with all the fancy graphics and editing?
The liberal leanings of the mainstream media have always been easy to see but the thing that strikes me about this is how utterly blatant it is. They don’t even seem to be the least bit concerned about the appearance of partiality. I wonder if they’ll be wearing their “Vote Obama” t-shirts.
Delicious
Digg
Reply to Duh
In reply to Duh: well, the free market sure isn't working for oil and energy in general. Its not working for global warming. Its not working in the mortgage market. I agree it worked for Fox - but that is because it is not a news channel. It is entertainment.
And as far as being a proud conservative. Well, all I can say is this must be the "pride" before the "fall". Pride can be a blinding trait - and being conservative is not a nationality. You, like many others fall into this trap of politicians that divides the country, principally between North and South, and along racial lines. This is not something to take any pride in. It is something that should be fixed.
I think politicians like Obama who really are neither right or left, or this or that ideology but rather intelligent, common sense people with a broad perspective coupled with a strong moral core are what America needs. It does not particularly need a liberal or a conservative ideology. There are virtues and vices to both those labels. The right place for America at any given time is a mixture of the best of both of them tailored to suit the times.
You know, it is Obama that is in fact the mainstream here; he might not look mainstream on the outside, but inside, he is mainstream to the core. And you know what, its what's inside that counts. This is what America really needs at this time... What an exciting opportunity! Wake up and smell the roses!
CHAZZYKC IS RIGHT ABOUT THE SPELLING OF PILONIDAL
Ghod I hate when the loony right is right.
Please don't start up again about Rush Limbaugh. Now I have to do the Warthog Sky Dance all over to remind the world that he's an uneducated pill-head draft dodger who can't maintain a relationship with an adult woman but who can get caught with the remainder of a bottle of Viagra coming home from the sex vacation capital of the Caribbean. Oh--and his father, grandfather, brother, cousin, and uncle are all lawyers.
There's something like twenty million Rushpuppets out there who sit at his feet, begging to be "entertained" by this obese cretin, on the economy, on political history, on moral issues, and on the topic of slimeball ambulance-chasing lawyers.
Next on Fox: Ted Kennedy on sobriety, Bill Clinton on the importance of marital fidelity, and Bill Richardson on a comprehensive physical fitness program.
Oh--civility. "Cindy Sheehan lost her son. Get over it. We all lose things."
Cyst boy
You might be wise to spend a little more time reading some of those books that you get your opinions from. It's pilonidal cyst ....not pilonodal
DUH
To suggest that the big 3 are "in the tank" for Obama, though clearly true, is not the issue of concern to me.
The duplicitous idiot that the dems have running the house is clearly committed to instituting that incredibly inappropriately named "fairness doctrine" legislation. The Democrat party is not about "fair", they are about control.
They are unwilling to even acknowledge that the the mainstream favors them, all the while whining that the lack of balance on radio is so unfair.
Leave it alone. The free market works. The proof of that is the success of Fox News. They immediately captured a huge market share because they offered something other than left biased presentations. They were the first to do so in television.
They were successful with civility. The real reason that air america failed so miserably ( listened to them alot for 2 months 2 years ago) was that they displayed no civility....not any.
They were ranters and, much like Olbermann, never allowed opposing perspectives to be heard. They were rude and displayed no respect for anyone or anything that did not agree with their view. They did not either entertain very well nor engage the opposition.... 2 things that Mr Limbaugh does so very well. He is a proud conservative. I do not hear anybody on the left declare themselves proudly to be liberal.......even that bastion of liberal thinkers at the publicly funded PBS actually present themselves as centrists!!
Why please are the new liberals incapable of engaging with civility. They are all as insulting to civility as Hannity is on the right.
Nick
We’re talking about a news broadcast here not the opinion page. The news division is not supposed to be driven by “sexy” or “en vogue” or ratings but rather driven to inform the people in a neutral fashion. It is certainly not driven by profit since the news departments at the three networks routinely lose huge amounts of money.
In a presidential election year it is unacceptable that one candidate should receive so much more favorable attention than the other. Especially if the one candidate has so much in his favor to begin with as you suggest Obama has.
By the way; I thought Obama was the guy who was supposed to transcend race. If this is true then why does the fact that he’s the first African-American frontrunner deserve extra notoriety? You remind me twice that he’s African-American. I don’t think the color of his skin would have a thing to do with how good of a president he would make.
Back in January, when McCain was somewhat of a media darling, (remember even The Star endorsed him on the Republican side) I predicted on this blog that the media would turn on him once he had secured the nomination. It appears I was correct.
Ross Balano Midwest Voices 2008
Bought and Paid For
http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/stumper/archive/2008/07/17/about-that-obama-trip.aspx
"But there's a big difference between McCain's trip and the one Obama will embark on next week to Europe and the Middle East. In what could be interpreted now as a possible strategic misstep, the McCain campaign chose not to take reporters along for the ride, forcing media outlets who wanted to cover the newly elected GOP nominee to travel on their own without any guarantee of getting anywhere near the senator. The small group of scribes who made the trek (Newsweek chose not to) faced a logistical nightmare, from arranging last-minute foreign visas to struggling to keep up with McCain as they flew commercially from stop to stop. (McCain traveled by a military aircraft.) In contrast, the Obama campaign is inviting reporters on its tour, handling all the logistics--including transportation--for what will certainly be a much larger press corps than usual."
Yeah, those crazy billionare liberals
Yeah, they're totally out of control. Why would they think that the first African American candidate frontrunner's visit to the Middle East is more newsworthy than an old man stumbling through a region he doesn't understand? To say that political affilition is the only factor involved, or really to attempt to prove that it is a factor at all, ignores the complexity of the isssue and fails to understand the concept of media as a business.
Let's see...Obama is a relatively young guy, the first ever African American frontrunner, it's his first trip to the Middle East for diplomatic talks, he appeals to youth in greater numbers than MCCain, his speechs are energetic as well as impassioned and he's "en vogue" at the moment. He is the "new" in a society that hates the "old." What do you think would garner higher ratings? McCain or Obama in the Middle East? You're right that it's unfair, but it's not solely because of a liberal bias, if any political bias at all. The bias here is a large-scale corporate bias. It is profit-driven, not politically driven. As long as media is a business, the big media companies will concentrate on what sells. Sorry, McCain just isn't that sexy. If he was, he would be the media darling--regardless of party affilition.
A little extreme
That's a little harsh, Chalveyob. Balano's been responsible for considerable "idiotic drivel" in the past, but this doesn't rise to the level of his best.
KO
What a completely Moronic post, thank you, we are all dumber after having to read your idiotic drivel!
Barnacle Bill Strikes Again
One slight correction to your intelligent, well-articulated column: Democrats don't always seem to be complaining about talk radio being so conservative. Democrats are simply much more likely to not get their opinions from AM radio. Democrats frequently own 'televisions,' and read 'books.'
The reason McCain is less likely to get coverage is that he does stupid things like put on a flak jacket and walk around guarded by an armored division yelping about how safe it is in the streets of Bagdad. Obama, having a much better grasp of the difference between Sunni and Shi'ite, is a whole lot safer to hang out with.