Majority Say Reporters Tried To Help Obama

[Revmitchell]

As the presidential campaign comes to a close, a majority of voters (51%) say most reporters have tried to help Barack Obama win the presidency. Just seven percent (7%) think they tried to help John McCain.

Thirty-one percent (31%) say reporters have offered unbiased coverage, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey. Ten percent (10%) are undecided.



http://www.rasmussenreports.com/pub...on/majority_say_reporters_tried_to_help_obama

 

[billwald]

Is the typical reporter at least as moral and intelligent as the typical Baptist? Is there something about reporting that turns people evil? What might it be?

 

[Jim1999]

I find the press covers what best sells adverts and newspapers, nevermind the story. The same thing is true with the presenters on the telly. I get tired of hearing the same story over and over and over again.

Just my opinion and why I stopped buying the news rags.

Cheers,

Jim

 

[billwald]

Don't confuse reporting and editing. I think most of the reporters in the field and the columnists are trying to produce an honest product.

The problem in Western Washington seems to be their basic schooling of the reporters. They have never been taught to think and to ask the right questions or to write sentences and paragraphs. I think the local papers scrimp of proof readers. Does anyone actually read the galleys before it goes to press?

 

[rbell]

Don't confuse reporting and editing.

Why not? Most of the press confuses the two.

I think most of the reporters in the field and the columnists are trying to produce an honest product.

Three words for you: New York Times.

• Nicholas Kristof, a Times columnist, readily and proudly admits the Times' bias: SOURCE
• Remember the hatchet job the NYT wrote on Cindy McCain? The NYT, and their partners in slander (the LA Times and Chicago Tribune) were unapologetically hateful and slanted in their coverage of the 2008 election: SOURCE
• Plagiarism and slanderous statements by Jayson Blair were left unchallenged for a long time...more leftist slanting was unchecked: SOURCE
• Liberal bias in the media is pervasive, a UCLA study proved: SOURCE

Heck, this is surface stuff. We could show a day's worth of trash.

I think the local papers scrimp of proof readers. Does anyone actually read the galleys before it goes to press?

Proofers catch typos and missspellings. Slanderous, leftist pontifications are a different matter altogether. You should know that.

 

[targus]

And these reporters just can't stop themselves.

Even though the election is over they continue to obsess on Palin.

Maybe now that they have successfully installed Obama into office they can do the work that they should have for the past two years and find out who Obama is, who his associations are and how did they influence his beliefs, and what are his views on various issues.

 

[windcatcher]

And these reporters just can't stop themselves.

Even though the election is over they continue to obsess on Palin.

Maybe now that they have successfully installed Obama into office they can do the work that they should have for the past two years and find out who Obama is, who his associations are and how did they influence his beliefs, and what are his views on various issues.

:laugh:
A new reason McCain couldn't win: He was so transparent before the election that they couldn't sell copy afterward....

But with Obama, he gave them enough good copy before the election without disclosure... and now that he's elected, they still have about 6 months of investigative reporting which they can do to keep the presses turning, to cover what they omitted during the election.

 

[LeBuick]

Maybe now that they have successfully installed Obama into office they can do the work that they should have for the past two years and find out who Obama is, who his associations are and how did they influence his beliefs, and what are his views on various issues.

I think Jim had it right when he said they report what sells and more stories about Wright and Ayres won't sell. Perhaps the far right might want to see this stuff but 54% of the nation have said they don't care. The far right have Fox and shows like Hanity to fill their desires for this stuff.

How will it help to strengthen our nation of we tear down our new leader before he even sits in the chair?

 

[Crabtownboy]

I think Jim had it right when he said they report what sells and more stories about Wright and Ayres won't sell. Perhaps the far right might want to see this stuff but 54% of the nation have said they don't care. The far right have Fox and shows like Hanity to fill their desires for this stuff.

How will it help to strengthen our nation of we tear down our new leader before he even sits in the chair?

I believe your 54% is far too conservative an estimate. I would say that at least 93% no long care a whit about Ayers or Wright.

Hmmm, Wright .... think I will try to find out what he really said, his historical comments. Might be an interesting thread.

 

[sag38]

I believe your 54% is far too conservative an estimate. I would say that at least 93% no long care a whit about Ayers or Wright.

Which is a sad commentary for the people of our nation.

 

[Martin]

Want proof that the media supports Obama? Chris Matthews of MNSBC, or the Obama For President Network, states openly that he believes it is his job to make sure that President Obama is a success. Click Here to see the evidence.

Now, to be fair, I think we all hope that President Obama is able to do something that fixes the economy. So in a sense we all hope that Obama is a successful president. Personally I don't want to see a unsuccessful president because that hurts the nation. However when thinking about Chris Matthews one has to wonder if he would have made the same remark about a President McCain. Somehow I really doubt it. Matthews has been a big supporter of Obama for a while.