Paper Dragon
Member
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2008
- Messages
- 640
Joe the Plumber was worth the closer look because he was presented by McCain as someone who would be negatively impacted by Obama's policy. I've read the stories, most of them were not biased, and came to the conclusion on my own that it's not the case.
As far as Spnited's question, perhaps ashamed is the wrong word. I'm embarrassed by it. I think it's a blight on the profession. I work very hard to keep my political beliefs out of my stories. The national media even has more responsibility to do that since they reach so many more people.
I will say that TV has been the worst offender (and no, Fox News does not cancel out the bias of the supposedly respectbale TV stations).
If I only read newspaper stories about the campaign, I might not feel embarrassed at all about the coverage. But I would and do feel left wanting for more critical reporting on Obama.
As far as Devil's point, how many of those hits are blogs? Probably a good many. And Waylon may be right that it's not respectable media's job to chase down every wild accusation bandied about by the blogs and McCain's campaign, but I do feel Obama could have been scrutinized more. It's obvious some reporters don't question him on anything.
I did enjoy the Reinventing of McCain piece in the New York Times Magazine last week. I thought it was very insightful in how a candidate who in 2000 was, in a way, Obama before Obama was Obama, basically transformed into George W. Bush. The media loved McCain back then. And to be fair to the media, he pissed a lot of that away himself by employing the Rove method of trying to control and manipulate the media and the message. That's the biggest reason the media has backfired on him, not a liberal bias.
In short, what I'm saying is question McCain, question Palin, question Biden and question Obama. It doesn't feel like the latter is happening enough.
As far as Spnited's question, perhaps ashamed is the wrong word. I'm embarrassed by it. I think it's a blight on the profession. I work very hard to keep my political beliefs out of my stories. The national media even has more responsibility to do that since they reach so many more people.
I will say that TV has been the worst offender (and no, Fox News does not cancel out the bias of the supposedly respectbale TV stations).
If I only read newspaper stories about the campaign, I might not feel embarrassed at all about the coverage. But I would and do feel left wanting for more critical reporting on Obama.
As far as Devil's point, how many of those hits are blogs? Probably a good many. And Waylon may be right that it's not respectable media's job to chase down every wild accusation bandied about by the blogs and McCain's campaign, but I do feel Obama could have been scrutinized more. It's obvious some reporters don't question him on anything.
I did enjoy the Reinventing of McCain piece in the New York Times Magazine last week. I thought it was very insightful in how a candidate who in 2000 was, in a way, Obama before Obama was Obama, basically transformed into George W. Bush. The media loved McCain back then. And to be fair to the media, he pissed a lot of that away himself by employing the Rove method of trying to control and manipulate the media and the message. That's the biggest reason the media has backfired on him, not a liberal bias.
In short, what I'm saying is question McCain, question Palin, question Biden and question Obama. It doesn't feel like the latter is happening enough.