Let’s talk about media bias and how the mainstream media delivers the news based on the political designation of the administration or the individual.
First example that comes to mind is the Exxon Valdez oil spill. The oil spill occurred back in March of 1989 when George H. Bush was President. Who could forget the evening news reports leading each night with the coverage of the “environmental disaster” and how Bush was “ignoring” efforts or his “ties” to the oil titans. There are some liberals who want to rewrite history and claim that Bush got a free pass, but those of us who recall the disaster remember the attacks the new President was taking. Now, let’s compare that to how the liberal media have treated Obama during the BP disaster. Very little accountability for the President. No demands for investigating why he’s administration awarded the highest award for safety for this rig. Tepid demand for him to do more for the clean-up operation. No calls for investigations into why it took so long for oil skimmers. No 10 minute a night coverage of oil covered birds and filthy landscape. Nope. Very little critical coverage of the President’s handling of the disaster.
Another example. When George W. Bush was President, the media would “honor” those who died in Iraq, but scrolling their names at the end of every evening newscast. Yes, the names would slowly go by with the ages posted alongside. Now anyone with a modicum of commonsense clearly knows that the mainstream media could care little about “honoring” the fallen, this was clearly an attempt to use these dead heroes for political propaganda. Scroll the names so Americans would see how many have died and they’d lose the stomach to continue to wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Today, you would think that no one is dying in Iraq or Afghanistan- no more the scrolling of the names of the fallen “honoring” them. No longer the daily body count posted in large bold numbers on our tv screens- no, the “honoring” has ceased with a Democrat in office.
And what about the “torture” prison in Guantanamo Bay, remember the monthly visits by the International Red Cross and by members of Congress who reported back about the “conditions”? Have the visits also ceased or has the media found Guantanamo not that interesting to follow any more? Aren’t these prisoners the same ones who the media claimed were being held indefinitely and without due process? Is these less an important story, because Bush isn’t President and Obama is?
Remember the “Great Depression of 1991″ where under George Bush the unemployment rate went to 6.8%. Night after night we heard about those who were left homeless, those who were starving… saw clips of people standing in unemployment lines, heard story after story about how neighbors and family members had lost their jobs… however, with 9.5% unemployment, record number of foreclosures, record number of bankruptcies, record number on foodstamps, and a record number on government assistance, we hardly hear or see anything in the mainstream media that compares to the coverage of 1991. Liberals will tell you that Obama inherited a recession and therefore should not be covered in the same way that George H. Bush was. Ok, so let recall the reaction and coverage by the mainstream media of George W. Bush in 2003 when he inherited a recession from Clinton. The average unemployment rate was 6.0% in 2003 and the mainstream media was relentless in its coverage of how awful things were for the American people.
Let’s look at the coverage of former Vice-Presidential candidate Sarah Palin. This woman is ripped apart each night in the media and yet, “suck on this” Al Gore with recent revelations that he sexually harassed a handful of women has gone virtually ignored. When revelations of John Edwards emerged, the medias excuse for not covering it as much as it did the story of Mark Sanford was that John Edwards was a “private citizen” with “no further political aspirations”. With Sarah Palin, we not only hear critical things about her, but the media sensationalizes stories about her children. Why? Is Al Gore not trying to impact policy? Was he not the former senior Senator from Tennessee? The two-time Presidential Candidate? The Vice President of the United States for 8 years? The Democrat Presidential nominee who lost becoming President by 350 votes? The Nobel Peace Prize Winner? Can we explain the media coverage of Sarah Palin and her family and the total lack of coverage regarding Al Gore and his massage escapades? Al Gore’s alleged treatment of women as nothing more than pieces of meat who he can forcefully demand sex from does not seem to merit coverage from the mainstream media. We can be sure that had Al Gore been a Republican, we would still be reading and hearing about it today.
It comes as no surprise that the American public would have a negative view of the Republican Party especially when there is such a bias in the way that Republicans and Democrats are covered. I would say, if the Democrats were covered in the same manner as Republicans or Republicans in the same manner as Democrats, one could argue that Republicans would retain a sizable majority in Congress and would easily win the Presidency. If the media is truly to be trusted, it must first and foremost cover the news in a fair and equitable manner. The importance of the media to our society is unquestionable and therefore they must present the facts and news in an unbiased manner and allow a well-informed citizenry to decide which course or direction it wishes to take. It is not the job of the media to hide facts, under report, bury stories, or skew in an effort to help elect a party that they best affiliate with. The public depends on them as an honest source of information to make informed decisions.
_____________
