Mediaite » MSM

After Strong Showing In Iowa, Why Is Ron Paul Still Getting The Media Cold Shoulder?

Josh Feldman — Mon, 15 Aug 2011 21:30:04 +0000

While Michele Bachmann claimed victory in the Iowa straw poll, Congressman Ron Paul came very close. The Texas congressman has attracted many passionate supporters, and yesterday an Associated Press article said he went from being a fringe candidate to “shaping the 2012 race.”

However, he has not exactly been a favorite of the mainstream media’s. Bachmann, the gold medalist of Iowa, was interviewed on every single Sunday morning news program, while Tim Pawlenty, the bronze medalist, got his fair share of media attention by announcing his withdrawl from the race the same day. Rick Perry got a decent amount of headlines for getting in the race, but his fellow Texan has not gotten the same in kind. The Examiner’s Timothy Carney puts it in perspective:

With Tim Pawlenty out of the race, only two active Presidential candidates scored more than 10 percent in Saturday’s Iowa straw poll. Following the media coverage Sunday, you would never guess Congressman Ron Paul was one of them.

On Sunday, Paul garnered less than half of the media coverage given to Governor Perry, and roughly half of the coverage Pawlenty got on the day he dropped out. Obviously, one of the factors to be considered here is the considerable amount of news made by both men, but why is Ron Paul still being ignored by the media at large?

Yesterday on CNN’s Reliable Sources, Roger Simon of Politico gave a fairly candid take on how Paul is being treated by the mainstream media.

“The media doesn’t believe Ron Paul has a hoot in hell’s chance of winning the Iowa caucuses, winning the Republican nomination, or winning the presidency, so we’re gonna ignore him.

Simon elaborated in a Politico piece today:

I asked Paul Monday if the media blackout disturbed him.

“It did disturb me, but it was not a total surprise,” he replied. “The result at Ames was significant; it might well have propelled us to the top tier. The media cannot change that.”

Though the media can, of course, change that since we get to determine who the top tier is.

“It is hard for them to accept,” Paul said of his showing at Ames. “I had one interview scheduled for this morning, a national program, but they canceled. It is shocking to be told nobody wants you.”

Was this because technically Paul came in second and not first? I don’t think so. Four years ago, Mike Huckabee came in a bad second to Romney, losing by 13.4 percentage points. Huckabee managed to spin that into a victory at Ames and became a media darling.

But Paul almost wins the thing and he remains poison.

Paul has done his best to hit the frontrunner candidates for their respective weaknesses. He took issue with Mitt Romney‘s statement that “corporations are people,” and went after Rick Perry for being part of the status quo and suggested his entry into the race could dilute the establishment vote.

I don’t believe the media ignoring Paul is necessarily part of a grand conspiracy, it’s just lazily moving forward with preconceived notions about who can win elections and who cannot. It’s quite a self-fulfilling prophecy. Here’s how it works: Candidate X enters presidential race. Candidate X gets very little MSM coverage. MSM says, “Candidate X has no chance of winning.” Why does Candidate X have no chance of winning? Because very few people know about Candidate X. Why? Because MSM hasn’t been covering Candidate X.

Michele Bachmann won the Iowa straw poll, she gets on all five morning shows. Ron Paul comes in second? Zilch. Not even a consolation prize. Damn, it is hard out there for a firebrand libertarian!

All I Saw: A Native Alaskan’s Look at the Media Coverage of Palin and Wasilla

Rick Webb — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 11:52:27 +0000

For a good media-savvy, liberal, that happens to be from Alaska, the last 10 months have been nothing short of depressing.

I’m an Alaskan. Born and raised. I lived there twenty years, and go back every year. My family’s from Wasilla. While I didn’t grow up there, my mother did. I summered there. My family is one of the oldest families in the town, and I’ve spent time there virtually every year of my life. My parents live on the old family homestead, at 42 mile Parks highway, and I own a sliver of it, right next to them, right across the lake from the now-infamous Wasilla Sports Complex.

Does this make me a Sarah Palin expert? No. I’ve shaken her hand, quickly and casually like you meet a politician, but I don’t know her. But being an Alaskan with deep Wasilla ties, I’ve followed her political career since the beginning. My mother served on the board of the library when Palin had her infamous censoring incident (the book in question, my mother says: Jon Stewart’s “America: The Book.”)

But it does make me a Wasilla expert, and in that capacity, I have come to learn about the sad state of the American media in a way I never thought I’d believe. I suspect this goes on all the time – when you have some knowledge of a subject or geography that is generally unknown to our nation’s journalism pool and then is suddenly thrust into the spotlight. Our family’s home town went from an obscure town no one heard of to a household word in weeks. It’s not the only time this has happened. Waco. Crawford. Hope.

But it’s the first and only time I’ve got to do an A-B test between reality and the media reporting.

The coverage has been abysmal. The recent coverage of the “Spenard Building Supplies” scandal is a perfect example. First off, it’s Spenard BUILDERS Supply. Like it says on their website. And they are not, and never have been, a contractor, as everyone in the state knows. I first encountered this on The Daily Beast, but they were pulling a story from the Voice, and all of them generally referenced “Alaskan Blogs” (which is a mystery in itself since the Alaskans would know better). As someone who trades in meme theory and viral marketing, this is fascinating. The incorrect name of this company – easily fact-checked by visiting their website now bubbles up some 1400 times in Google, many of them blog posts or news items. Also easily checked is the fact that SBS is not a contractor, as most of these articles imply.

Then there’s the context. The Palin camp response to the SBS scandal is comically perfect level-headed Alakan thinking, and includes some obvious facts that should have been in any original journalism about the subject. SBS was the only construction supply store in Wasilla at the time – everyone bought pretty much everything there. She wasn’t about to run for governor, she was about to run for lieutenant-governor. SBS is not Alaska-owned. These are all worthy points, but more than that, they were obvious to every Alaskan immediately upon reading the original accusations.

This continues with the whole Todd Palin Alaskan Independence Party brouhahaha. Pick up the phone and call any Alaskan ever even remotely following politics and they will tell you that yes, it’s completely conceivable and not that weird for Alaskans to have flirted with that party and not believed in independence. After Joe Vogler, the party’s founder, died in 1993, the party got used for a lot of different things. Hell, we even had an AIP governor, Wally Hickel, that was an old Republican and never once called for even so much as a referendum about Alaskan independence while governor.

These are not partisan opinions. My family is as liberal as Alaskan families come. And the list goes on. This isn’t even including the flat-out insults the town has had to endure. Wasilla, presented as a sea of box stores and misery, yet is a town of under 13 square miles serving as the hub of an area of rugged beauty the size of West Virginia. Wasilla’s ugly because people don’t live there. They live outside it. It’s a supply post.

The sad thing is I don’t think anything new is going on here. I suspect the media always covers these things with this sort of C+ at best coverage of new topics. The only thing new here is that I can see it happening. And it’s depressing. And, worse, its making this dyed-in-the-wool liberal feel bad for Palin and start to agree about media accuracy. I doubt I’m alone. Is it bias? Laziness? Probably a bit of both, but dispiriting nonetheless.

Rick Webb, a native Alaskan, is the co-founder and COO of The Barbarian Group. He lives in New York.

Sarah Palin Blames the Media (Again), And Everyone Comes Out a Winner!

Steve Krakauer — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 03:28:00 +0000

The immediate reaction to Gov. Sarah Palin‘s unexpected announcement Friday: mass confusion by the “media elites.” The timing was less a “news dump” and more a “screw you” to her mortal enemies in the fourth estate. This time, though, even the conservatives were confused: Charles Krauthammer called it “erratic;” Hot Air’s Ed Morrissey essentially wrote her political obituary.

Oh, “gotcha” media, you just don’t understand how things are done in the “real world.”

In her speech, Palin made a passing reference to the media: “I wish you’d hear more from the media of your state’s progress and how we tackle Outside interests – daily – special interests that would stymie our state.” (Note: not sure why “Outside” is in caps, but that’s how it appears in the transcript on her Web site.)

But that was just the beginning. In a July 4 letter to Alaskans that doubled as a reaction to two days worth of media coverage of her Friday announcement, Palin turned her hunting rifle on the journos. Here’s the entire editor-needing section:

The response in the main stream media has been most predictable, ironic, and as always, detached from the lives of ordinary Americans who are sick of the “politics of personal destruction”. How sad that Washington and the media will never understand; it’s about country. And though it’s honorable for countless others to leave their positions for a higher calling and without finishing a term, of course we know by now, for some reason a different standard applies for the decisions I make.

Putting aside the idea she’s quitting because of a “higher calling,” how is the mainstream media responsible for the reaction to her speech? Palin had every right to be annoyed with David Letterman, and it’s true that some in the media have taken unabashed and bizarre glee in seeing her fail. But choosing to leave office on the Friday before July 4, in a hastily thrown-together news conference (with geese loudly interrupting), left the media more confused than celebratory.

Even one of Palin’s biggest defenders in the “gotcha” media, Fox News anchor Greta Van Susteren, is miffed. In a blog post Sunday, she asks, “Does Gov Palin resigning set back women?” It’s a question, and she doesn’t draw a conclusion. But if Matt Lauer, or Charlie Gibson, or the gotcha-est of them all, Katie Couric, asked the same question, Palin’s supporters would be jumping in at even the slightest implication.

At the end of the day, the media embraces the “blame the media” storylines, because it allows them to talk about the thing they love the most — themselves. We’re curious what’s up, Gov. Palin, and nobody is interested in you going away. If you went away, who would the media have to kick around?

• Rachel Sklar thinks Palin owes the media an apology.

—–

• Follow Steve Krakauer on Twitter

Friday News Dump! The Twittering Class Reacts to Sarah Palin’s Resignation

Glynnis MacNicol — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 22:10:45 +0000

In the age of Twitter there is no such thing as a (Federal holiday) Friday afternoon news dump! Shortly after Sarah Palin announced from Wasilla, Alaska that she would be resigning as Governor effective July 25 our Twitter feed blew up with reactions from the media world. Here’s a quick look at some of the responses.

Mediaite: Cameron sums all up: “To some, this is the end of her political career. To others, it’s the beginning of her pres. campaign” SK

Lloyd Grove: Is this a great country or what? A live Sarah Palin steals the spotlight from a dead Michael Jackson!

Brian Stelter: Landed; surprised passengers with the NYT news alert about Palin. Reading reax via @mediaite, @joenbc, @mikeallen, @dceiver, etc

Jay Rosen: No politician in our time has lived her political life at a wider variance from verifiable fact than Palin. That is why rage surrounds her.

Mediaite: Townhall blogger, #Palin supporter, on MSNBC: “This is tantamount to a star quarterback who doesn’t mature..Not a happy day” SK

Ari Melber: BECAUSE NO ONE CAN WAIT FOR BLOGS WHEN IT COMES TO PALIN. RT @markosm: Seriously, Twitter was made for days like these. Right #tcot?

Mark Knoller: Palin said her kids influenced by “seeing their baby brother Trig mocked and ridiculed by some pretty mean-spirited adults recently.”

Rachel Sklar: Wow. Sarah Palin. Was it something that Todd Purdum uncovered but didn’t publish? Was it those really tight spandex pants in Runner’s World?

Caroline McCarthy: I’m going to imagine that Palin and Sanford hooked up at a Republican governors’ convention in the gubernatorial equivalent of a SXSW tryst.

Andrew Sullivan: “In some ways, this is a moment to reflect on McCain, and his irresponsibility, not Palin and her drama. ” — Andrew Sullivan on Palin-fail

Jason Linkins: I can tell you from experience the only person who could break the internet like Michael Jackson is Sarah Palin.

Mike Allen: Sarah Palin spokewoman Meg Stapleton on Fox: “She saw their block and went around it” — say what? #Palin

Andy Borowitz: Comedians Call Palin Resignation ‘Devastating Blow’ http://tinyurl.com/neuv6m

Scott Simon: RT from the hilarious badbana on Gov Palin’s resignation: “Once you get a little taste of Iowa and Vermont, you can’t go back to Alaska.”

The Cajun Boy: Been told by Alaskan friends that there have been rumors swirling for weeks that the IRS has something big on the Palins.

Steve Krakauer: RT @mediaite: #Palin sksprsn on FNC: Letterman attack “pushed Willow to vote yes” for Palin to step down. And NOW he’s part of the story.

Leslie Sanchez: Too premature 2 predict outcome, but strong pts here RT @conservatweet [Hot Air] Is Palin’s nat politcal career over? http://bit.ly/1ayMen

Major Garrett: Obama WH, w/staff who pilloried every Palin campaign gaffe (real & perceived) mum today. Defers to DNC’s resignation label: “bizzare.”

Brian Stelter: Reading Palin’s statement. http://bit.ly/73PBj Twitter search suggests “pass the ball” could be the new “hiking the Appalachian trail.”

Front Page Whiplash: Media’s Rolicking Ride Into Summer

Glynnis MacNicol — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 17:20:06 +0000

It’s not your imagination! Last week was a schizophrenic news week. Phew. So much for a summer news slump! Remember Iran? Whilst Twitter turned its attention to matters MJ and Sarah Palin they have opted to put the British Embassy on trial for inciting last month’s enormous revolt. Anyway nothing like some screen grabs of the NYT homepage to get a sense of the recent whiplash the media has experienced. The first is from June 25, the second from July 3.

“On the Internet Mr. Jackson was dead, and on TV he was still alive.”

Rachel Sklar — Sun, 28 Jun 2009 18:56:37 +0000

What does it take to confirm – scratch that, report – a celebrity death? Any death? Any piece of news? And whom can you trust in that reporting? These are the core media questions raised by Michael Jackson’s death on Thursday, which TMZ reported first, and without reservation – but which most “reputable” news sources declined to take as confirmation, instead waiting for almost an hour to report the death themselves, only after independent confirmation from the LA Times. In his report on those unfolding events in the New York Times, Brian Stelter doesn’t necessarily answer these questions, but he certainly sketches out just how stark the difference they made was on Thursday afternoon:

“For more than an hour, TMZ was essentially the only outlet claiming that Mr. Jackson was dead. Television and newspaper journalists read the TMZ report but largely held off on repeating it, for fear of making a mistake. Still, the bulletin traversed the Web with remarkable speed, creating a stark divide: on the Internet Mr. Jackson was dead, and on TV he was still alive.”

Other points of note:

TMZ posted news of death at 5:20 pm — a full six minutes before the coroner’s office (and the Jackson family)
The reason TMZ was alone with the news for so long was that no one else could confirm it. TMZ did not source its report. “Paramedics on the scene ‘said he was dead long before we posted the story,’ Mr. Levin said, perhaps providing a hint about the his sources.” (More than a hint is provided here, in this TMZ report from Friday, “Emergency Workers Felt Jackson Dead At Scene.”)
“The Jackson entry in Wikipedia appeared to have set the record as the most-viewed article in the eight-year history of the online encyclopedia”
And this part: “‘We are totally wired in this town,’ Harvey Levin, the site’s editor in chief, said in a telephone interview Friday.” Clearly.

Great article, but slap on the wrist for whichever editor did this: “Twitter saw the biggest increase in short tweets since the presidential election.” As opposed to long tweets? I’m sure Brian Stelter didn’t write that. A tweet is short by definition. C’mon, NYT, get with it.