Free Markets, Free People

MSM – the traditional Democratic ally?

I’m sure you’re watching the MSM give a huge collective yawn concerning the Obama video that has been surfaced showing an Obama that most of America hasn’t seen.

“Old news” they’re saying.  “We’ve covered it,” they claim.  Funny, I don’t remember it (oh, it was on MSNBC?  No wonder no one has seen it).

Meanwhile the MSM is fixed on 1985 videos of Mitt Romney and his stance on … Vietnam?

Ed Driscoll, via Instapundit, sums up a couple of points that are pretty much true.  First, he quotes Andrew Ferguson at Commentary, who makes a good point using the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle as a basis:

Heisenberg’s principle can be crudely generalized (it’s the best I can do) as follows: An observer can change the nature of a thing or an event merely through the act of observation. Observation all by itself can become an intervention. Heisenberg was describing how reality works at the level of quantum mechanics, where a wave becomes a particle and vice versa depending on how it’s being measured. But it applies, too, at the level of political journalism, where reality is even stranger. There, facts can become interpretations, interpretations can become facts, and events of no significance can achieve an earthshaking importance simply by virtue of being pawed over by a large number of journalists.

A typical journalist, if he’s any good, insists at least theoretically on the iron divide between observer and participant. At its best the press corps sees itself as a squadron of Red Cross workers, wandering among the combatants in a battle zone and ensuring their own safety with a claim of strict neutrality. The Heisenberg Principle of Journalism puts the lie to all that. You see it at work whenever a news anchor announces that “this story just refuses to go away” or a headline writer insists that “questions continue to be raised” about the conduct of one hapless public figure or another.

The story refuses to go away, of course, because the anchor and his colleagues won’t let it; and the questions that continue to be raised are being raised by the headline writer and his editors. Reporters create more news than anybody, just by pretending they’re watching it unfold.

How often have we seen the absolute over-kill by the media on stories most would consider trivial.  It seems to always depend on who is involved, doesn’t it?   But, as Bengazi and Fast and Furious are proving, the inverse is also true.  The MSM can blatantly ignore what most would consider important stories as well.   Driscoll lists the exceptions:

Let’s.  And that’s precisely what the media is doing.  I’d also add to that list a litany of economic failure that is simply being ignored.

Or to put it another way, as the Washington Examiner notes tonight in an editorial, “To believe Obama is to forget the last four years.” That’s what both the Obama Administration and their palace guard are hoping.

It has gotten so obvious that even Howard Fineman has criticized the press for its obvious bias and its selective coverage.  Pat Caudell went off on the media just the other day.

The intent of the media?  To drag their chosen one across the finish line regardless of how poorly he’s done.   There seems to be no attempt to hide it anymore.  Simply peruse the stories of the day, identify what should be the stories of the day (a useful tool is to identify something not being covered and say to one’s self “if that were a Republican president …”), and it becomes clear which side, literally, the press is on.

Tonight is going to be interesting as well.  We’ll see how subtle the “moderators” of the debate are going to be about their bias by the questions they ask.  Will they focus on the economy, the unfulfilled Obama promises, the disaster his foreign policy has become, ObamaCare and its cost, etc.  Or are we going to talk about “lady parts”, what Romney said in 1985 and the evil Bain corporation.

My guess?  Not much economy, not much Obama record, lots about Mitt’s past (with the excuse that we know about Obama, but this is an opportunity to introduce America to Romney).

Twitter: @McQandO
Facebook: QandO

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUponShare on RedditPin on PinterestEmail this to someone

17 Responses to MSM – the traditional Democratic ally?

  • It no longer works to refer to press “bias”.  The Mushroom Media is openly acting as the Collective’s propaganda team in ways that are unprecedented.  It is amazing to watch if you’ve lived long enough to remember when their was a functioning press in the United States.
    I’m sometimes surprised to read comments by people who think that Romney’s campaign is in hibernation.  They make the cardinal mistake of assuming that, because they have not been seeing news of it, nothing is happening.  The news embargo appears to extend to even the local level in many cases, since big, well-attended events are only reported in the New Media.
    As I’ve said a few times lately, “Just think how this would be seen if we had a functioning press”.  Or, as Walter Russell Meade puts it, “…if there was a Republican in office, this would be a real story”.

    • I prefer to call them “minions.”
      It has that “Dr Evil” sound to it, that it deserves.

    • It is horrifying Rags. We keep trumpeting the MSMs declining trust and revenue and relevance, but the fact is the death of the old media structure isn’t happening nearly fast enough. We’re going to have to deal with these cretins for at least another decade.

  • Oh, they were willing to buy a ‘Vast Right Wing Conspiracy’ when Billy Jeff was President.  But Journolist?  Skewed Polls?  Rampant Media Bias?    IMPOSSIBLE!!!!!! FERVID FEVER SWAMP FANTASY!  RIGHT WING DEMENTIA!

  • From the Obama tape:
    “Unlike residents of majority-black New Orleans, the federal government considers those victims “part of the American family.”
    This certainly explains the Obama Administration’s response to ice storms in Tennessee in early 2009 … Obama showed no interest, wouldn’t visit or even declare it a disaster zone … while some folks, “part of the American family,” were in the dark and cold for weeks.

    Excellent piece fisking the falsehoods about Katrina in Obama’s hate rant at Hampton.
    Also, take note of the embrace of the mythology of “more Black men in prison than in college”.  It is a popular Collectivist lie, and is easily debunked.

  • “I am Barack the Chosen one.  When I am your President, it’s not that things won’t go badly wrong, they will, you just won’t hear about them.  So, if it doesn’t affect you directly, it may take many months before you have to be sad or upset.  Perhaps you will never hear!  Rejoice!  Think of the hours of anguish I have spared you!”

  • Here’s my prediction for tonight –
    part of Obama’s opening will be “I am Barack Obama, if re-elected, I will declare myself Emperor Barack Obama the first and will rule by imperial edict”.   His comments will largely involve redistribution of wealth and the numerous government handout programs he intends to improve or implement.  He’ll offer citizenship to all foreigner’s now living abroad and promise to enslave everyone making over $259,000 a year, with Presidential exceptions being granted.
    Romney will offer the world a cure for cancer that he received from an extraterrestrial ambassador at 3:00 Pacific Time today, he’ll go on to enumerate flawless plans for solving our economic problems and entirely eliminate the deficit.
    As soon as the debate is over, and for the remainder of the week the press will declare Obama won.

  • Forget “Private sector is doing fine” and “You didn’t build that”; if PutinGate didn’t bring him down, nothing will.
    That (PutinGate) indicates to me that America is so loaded with whores, who intend to live off the public tit regardless of consequences and nothing will stop them short of utter catastrophy.
    And notice that the right side of the media harps on “Built it”, showing THEIR priorities.

  • The intent of the media?  To drag their chosen one across the finish line regardless of how poorly he’s done.
    No.  Not quite.  They have both angles covered.
    If Obama wins because of it.  Great.
    If Obama loses, combined with the poll results and voting controversies the Romney side was baited into, we’ll know the election was stolen.  If it wasn’t stolen we’ll know it was voter disenfranchisement and we have to get rid of those voter ID laws that interfere with the disenfranchised.  etc…
    They are poised to benefit from both outcomes.