Is The News Media Guilty of Intentionally Manipulating Recent Elections? - Comments Page 2

Is the media intentionally causing close elections in the name of big ratings, and even bigger revenue?

I’m going to ask you to do something very difficult: put your opinions of the candidates away for a moment and look at this election from another angle. I think I've got it figured out now, it's not pretty, and I hope I’m wrong.…
Read comments below, or read this article from the beginning.

Article comments

  • 26 - Jet

    Sep 13, 2008 at 8:05 pm

    If you think about it, in the elections since 1998 the Democrats were always the underdog.

    Could that be the reason that they gave so much attention to them, in order to even things up? They couldn't give a damn who won the elections, just as long as things were close, so they tried to help the Dems gain poll numbers to get close to even...

    Remember how everyone was glued to their sets waiting to see if the Dems could take back either house of Congress?

    The news media succeeded, even at the risk of being branded biased and liberal... of course afterward they laughed all the way to the bank.

  • 27 - Ruvy

    Sep 13, 2008 at 8:06 pm

    Jet,

    This is the first article I've seen that actually deals with something that most folks writing about this election are managing to ignore - reality.

    Since the Democratic Convention, most of the articles have been lambs set at the feet of St. Obama, or more recently a wet t-shirt party for Sarah Palin. But as for the overfed pricks fine journalists who make up the "mainstream media", I think you have the whole thing right on the money.

  • 28 - Jet

    Sep 13, 2008 at 8:13 pm

    Thank you Ruvy, much appreciated my friend

  • 29 - Jet

    Sep 13, 2008 at 8:15 pm

    I'm surprised no one's commented on the two shot of Palan and Walker

  • 30 - Baronius

    Sep 13, 2008 at 8:30 pm

    Jet, I don't see a need to believe that the press collectively stages the news. Maybe it's true. But this is one of those Occam's Razor things. In your theory, you have to assume bad intentions. In mine, they're largely just inept. Also, your theory wouldn't explain why they treat everything like a horse race.

  • 31 - Jet

    Sep 13, 2008 at 8:38 pm

    Fair enough Mr. B

  • 32 - Cindy D

    Sep 14, 2008 at 10:38 am

    lol @ troll :-)

    Jet,

    I loved Fame!

  • 33 - Lisa Solod Warren

    Sep 14, 2008 at 10:42 am

    Not a problem, Jet. All is forgiven. After all, Rosh Hashanah is coming up:)

  • 34 - Condor

    Sep 15, 2008 at 10:45 pm

    Jet, thanks for the article.

    I had this media bias explained to me once as mere dialetical materialism (DM). Could be, but in a capitalistic society (like it or not), I tend to think this bias is a mix of DM along with advertizing dollars in the mix.

    Anyone familiar with the Annenberg Foundation? It was founded to "advance the public well-being through improved communication" and has spoken out regarding some poor judgement by major news sources in releasing stories which were not researched and conveyed inaccuracies that could only harm journilistic validity. Why, some writers here tend to project their own jaded opinions in the interest of "educating" the readers. But in essence is just a promotion of propaganda that has been injested and thereby propagated, without research, trusting anecdotal sources of information over scholorly/researched sources.

    The real hoot is when some writers are called on their faulty research, they either shrug it off, or deflect it away from slipshod writing and research methods.

    I find it all quite amusing.

  • 35 - Jet

    Oct 20, 2008 at 11:20 pm

    Has anyone noticed that now that Obama showed a clear lead, suddenly the news agencies are saying the polls have them nearly tied?

    ...as I predicted.

    Now if McCain begins showing strength, you can be Obama will begin climbing in the polls.

  • 36 - Jet

    Oct 25, 2008 at 4:35 am

    Can anyone else explain why this election is so completely tied?

  • 37 - pablo

    Oct 25, 2008 at 4:42 am

    I could try Jet, but you would not believe me. I do however take issue with your thesis that the primary function of the MSM is to sell advertising, by increasing ratings. The main purpose of the MSM is to program human beings for the people that own the MSM. That in itself is far more profitable in the long run then increased advertising revenue, and they are damned good at it.

  • 38 - Jet

    Oct 25, 2008 at 4:44 am

    After writing an Anti-Obama article, I remained undecided for a while. Three factors have changed that.

    1. Colin Powell's endorement carried a lot of weight with me.

    2. John McCain's age makes the thought of Sara Palin and her "first dude" becoming President in a few years, with the keys to the CIA, FBI and the Nuclear arsenal too much to even consider her being competant.

    3. John McCain's age and his sudden attempt to curry favor of the far-right that would influence his appointment of supreme court justices.

  • 39 - Jet

    Oct 25, 2008 at 4:47 am

    Point taken Pablo... to a point.

  • 40 - Jet

    Nov 03, 2008 at 4:55 pm

    If I'm right about this, McCain should have a sudden surge in the polls today so we'll all be tuning in tomorrow night?

Add your comment, speak your mind

Personal attacks are NOT allowed.
Please read our comment policy.
Please preview your comment.

blogcritics lists for Nov 29, 2009

fresh articles Most recent articles site-wide

fresh comments Most recent comments site-wide

most comments Most comments in 24hrs

top writers Most prolific Blogcritics for October

top commenters Most prolific Commenters in 24 hrs