USA Today cut Klobuchar from the pictures of the NH debate despite her strong performance. Another picture showed just her lower legs and feet.
Warren’s poll numbers and donations tanked after the media demanded that she explain how she would pay for her health care plan. In contrast Bernie recently told CNBC’s John Harwood that he didn’t think he needed to explain how he plans to pay for his much more generous plan “at this time”. The media has let him get away with it. I guess four years isn’t enough time for him to figure that out. I will post a link to a graph that shows clearly how the media treatment of Warren on this issue caused her poll numbers to drop sharply while Bernie’s soared.
Klobuchar’s numbers and donations tanked after the media reported that some of her staffers complained that she had a bad temper and yelled at them. There have been similar reports in in the Vermont media about Bernie being verbally abusive of his staffers but the media has ignored them.
It is the blatant sexism of the media, not the public, that worries me. It is clear that the media has learned nothing from its treatment of Hillary.
Hello Eric, Just want to say that I've really appreciated your work at Daily Kos, glad to find that I can follow you here. And I'm amazed at your sweetness in giving us the most modest sales pitch imaginable in this frantic age!
I Want to support you, I understand I have to pay for good journalism these days and I'm up around to $250 a year; Sorry, I'm still in shock from some major emergency house repairs, so no big promises here. Yet my local community radio station lets people sign up for a $5 month minimum bank charge, it's painless, and I do think you are just as important to our culture as they are..
I'll never be on Twitter, I'd still like to say to the world that I subscribed because you an excellent writer who understands the deep problems of modern media and citizen involvement.
much thanks! I appreciate the kind words. Press Run will be free for a couple months then I will ask subscribers to make modest monthly donation. thanks again!
Eric... love your work and enjoy you on Stephanie Miller. As someone who worked 10+ years in national media, you are so right. The irony though; despite the media double-standard, Hillary Clinton BEAT Trump by near 3-million votes! My solution: Quit referring to this dynamic generally as "the media." There's no mysterious "media" lurking out there; it's comprised anchors, reporters, pundits, and EPs. Name names-- whomever it is. If Chuck Todd offers up a double standard, call him out. Call out the people who stack the show. Everyone is fair game. Unless and until the people in the anchor chair(s) and those putting together the show rundown start owning their own message, nothing will change. The "media" reports on themselves, and packages that as news. Wtf is that all about?! OK-- I'm done. For now. :)
Eric, why does the media push the narrative that the definition of a good debate or a good debate performance rests on the number of insults or jabs administered? It seems to me that may be good for ratings or selling the ”show”, but for me a good debate depends on how well a candidate explains their ideas and answers challenging questions about their proposed plans. CNN often advertises the debates like an MMA fight, and all of the networks go on about insults hurled as definitive of leadership potential.
I worry that pushing this as the standard for effective debate performance will most likely favor shameless bullies like Trump than thoughtful intellects. I can not help but believe that money plays a significant in driving this agenda, the objective being to up viewership and increase ratings which equates to more ad dollars.
What do you think? And mind you, debaters can disagree, but some of what happened in yesterday’s debate seemed gratuitous and counterproductive.
it’s a couple things I think. part of it is the press loves to cover campaigns, and esp primaries, as fights. so everything’s a “brawl.” and “heated” etc. policy is considered kinda boring. second, obviously Trump has changed culture and press *really* buys into idea politics is abt insults, not problem solving
To your second point, Trump received an abundance of free air time because he drove ratings. He said and continues to say things that proved untrue, incredibly offensive, and often childish. However, people seemed to tune in and networks made out like bandits. It seems we Americans have opened a Pandora’s Box and now we move down the slippery slope toward making the future world as portrayed in Idiocracy more of a reality. Still, the networks and mainstream media need to concern themselves with exacerbating the problem and speeding our decline.
Parliament in England has perfected this insult as the life’s blood of political discourse. We are too thin skinned. We are fighting for our democratic republic. Vetting and finding fault lines in our group of candidates. Draconian but political paddy cakes won’t cut it.
People keep thinking that the Vietnam/civil rights/Watergate era reporting was normal and is. Still the norm.
The norm before then and since the late 1980s has to eliminate all nearly all context, specially the crap the GOP has been pulling since Nixon — the culmination of which we’re experiencing now: A mobster POTUS running amok with zero push back from party and woefully, insufficiently from the press.
More on point here: If electability was handled honestly, issues would have to addressed instead of ignored as in 2016. Issues would determine electability. Instead, the establishment are again shoving bullshit down our throats. They aren’t just failing the nation thereby but doing real harm. (Again see the state we’re in.) in fact, 2016is exactly how the establishment media roll so, in a sense, there’s no lesson since it was just SOP. Still is.
I agree. and as I mentioned in recent column abt mostly white journalists covering Iowa and NH and maybe convincing themselves that’s what America looks like, more diversity in newsrooms is badly needed
This is off topic but it also drives me crazy that no one in the media seems to have basic knowledge about the healthcare systems of other countries. They have no clue that Germany, Switzerland, the Netherlands, Belgium and Japan all use primarily private insurance bought by individuals or employers to achieve universal, affordable, quality health care. Those countries also offer a choice of a government run “public option”.
Those systems are based on the 100+ year old model created by Otto von Bismarck. They work well and much more cheaply than ours does. The plans proposed by Biden, Klobuchar, Buttigieg and Bloomberg are similar to that model. Just today the usually well-informed Ali Velshi reported on the health care systems of other countries and claimed they were all single payer, Medicare for All systems.
There is no excuse for this kind of ignorance. The media has been misreporting on the issue of health care since the Clintons tried to reform it.
even worse, health care has been among the top voter issues for years now, according to polling data. Ie you’d think press would drill down more on topic instead of incessant “how will you pay for it” debate questions
Warren was deleted from NBC's head-to-head poll yesterday...it doesn't get worse than that.
Amazing right?
USA Today cut Klobuchar from the pictures of the NH debate despite her strong performance. Another picture showed just her lower legs and feet.
Warren’s poll numbers and donations tanked after the media demanded that she explain how she would pay for her health care plan. In contrast Bernie recently told CNBC’s John Harwood that he didn’t think he needed to explain how he plans to pay for his much more generous plan “at this time”. The media has let him get away with it. I guess four years isn’t enough time for him to figure that out. I will post a link to a graph that shows clearly how the media treatment of Warren on this issue caused her poll numbers to drop sharply while Bernie’s soared.
Klobuchar’s numbers and donations tanked after the media reported that some of her staffers complained that she had a bad temper and yelled at them. There have been similar reports in in the Vermont media about Bernie being verbally abusive of his staffers but the media has ignored them.
It is the blatant sexism of the media, not the public, that worries me. It is clear that the media has learned nothing from its treatment of Hillary.
The links to the article about Bernie’s abusive treatment of staffers.
https://www.sevendaysvt.com/vermont/anger-management-sanders-fights-for-employees-except-his-own/Content?oid=2834657
Here is a link to the graph showing how Warren’s numbers dropped and Bernie’s soared.
https://stevenrattner.com/2020/01/steven-rattners-morning-joe-charts-sanders-rise-in-the-polls-comes-with-an-expensive-price-tag/
Hello Eric, Just want to say that I've really appreciated your work at Daily Kos, glad to find that I can follow you here. And I'm amazed at your sweetness in giving us the most modest sales pitch imaginable in this frantic age!
I Want to support you, I understand I have to pay for good journalism these days and I'm up around to $250 a year; Sorry, I'm still in shock from some major emergency house repairs, so no big promises here. Yet my local community radio station lets people sign up for a $5 month minimum bank charge, it's painless, and I do think you are just as important to our culture as they are..
I'll never be on Twitter, I'd still like to say to the world that I subscribed because you an excellent writer who understands the deep problems of modern media and citizen involvement.
much thanks! I appreciate the kind words. Press Run will be free for a couple months then I will ask subscribers to make modest monthly donation. thanks again!
How The Media’s Email Obsession Obliterated Clinton Policy Coverage
WRITTEN BY ERIC BOEHLERT
PUBLISHED 11/02/16 12:03 PM EDT
(By Eric Boehlert, article) Recently from the opinion pages of the Washington Post: "Mass propaganda used to be difficult, but Facebook made it easy"
Eric... love your work and enjoy you on Stephanie Miller. As someone who worked 10+ years in national media, you are so right. The irony though; despite the media double-standard, Hillary Clinton BEAT Trump by near 3-million votes! My solution: Quit referring to this dynamic generally as "the media." There's no mysterious "media" lurking out there; it's comprised anchors, reporters, pundits, and EPs. Name names-- whomever it is. If Chuck Todd offers up a double standard, call him out. Call out the people who stack the show. Everyone is fair game. Unless and until the people in the anchor chair(s) and those putting together the show rundown start owning their own message, nothing will change. The "media" reports on themselves, and packages that as news. Wtf is that all about?! OK-- I'm done. For now. :)
thanks Mark, good point! whenever possible I do try to be specific and name names, but often it is necessary yo use the umbrella “media”
Eric, why does the media push the narrative that the definition of a good debate or a good debate performance rests on the number of insults or jabs administered? It seems to me that may be good for ratings or selling the ”show”, but for me a good debate depends on how well a candidate explains their ideas and answers challenging questions about their proposed plans. CNN often advertises the debates like an MMA fight, and all of the networks go on about insults hurled as definitive of leadership potential.
I worry that pushing this as the standard for effective debate performance will most likely favor shameless bullies like Trump than thoughtful intellects. I can not help but believe that money plays a significant in driving this agenda, the objective being to up viewership and increase ratings which equates to more ad dollars.
What do you think? And mind you, debaters can disagree, but some of what happened in yesterday’s debate seemed gratuitous and counterproductive.
it’s a couple things I think. part of it is the press loves to cover campaigns, and esp primaries, as fights. so everything’s a “brawl.” and “heated” etc. policy is considered kinda boring. second, obviously Trump has changed culture and press *really* buys into idea politics is abt insults, not problem solving
To your second point, Trump received an abundance of free air time because he drove ratings. He said and continues to say things that proved untrue, incredibly offensive, and often childish. However, people seemed to tune in and networks made out like bandits. It seems we Americans have opened a Pandora’s Box and now we move down the slippery slope toward making the future world as portrayed in Idiocracy more of a reality. Still, the networks and mainstream media need to concern themselves with exacerbating the problem and speeding our decline.
Thanks for your thoughtful reply.
Yep, CNN once famously cut away from Hillary campaign appearance to show Trump’s empty podium
Parliament in England has perfected this insult as the life’s blood of political discourse. We are too thin skinned. We are fighting for our democratic republic. Vetting and finding fault lines in our group of candidates. Draconian but political paddy cakes won’t cut it.
yes Dems often brings knife to GOP gun fights,
People keep thinking that the Vietnam/civil rights/Watergate era reporting was normal and is. Still the norm.
The norm before then and since the late 1980s has to eliminate all nearly all context, specially the crap the GOP has been pulling since Nixon — the culmination of which we’re experiencing now: A mobster POTUS running amok with zero push back from party and woefully, insufficiently from the press.
More on point here: If electability was handled honestly, issues would have to addressed instead of ignored as in 2016. Issues would determine electability. Instead, the establishment are again shoving bullshit down our throats. They aren’t just failing the nation thereby but doing real harm. (Again see the state we’re in.) in fact, 2016is exactly how the establishment media roll so, in a sense, there’s no lesson since it was just SOP. Still is.
I agree that deliberate lack of context has been hallmark of DC for too long
I agree. and as I mentioned in recent column abt mostly white journalists covering Iowa and NH and maybe convincing themselves that’s what America looks like, more diversity in newsrooms is badly needed
This is off topic but it also drives me crazy that no one in the media seems to have basic knowledge about the healthcare systems of other countries. They have no clue that Germany, Switzerland, the Netherlands, Belgium and Japan all use primarily private insurance bought by individuals or employers to achieve universal, affordable, quality health care. Those countries also offer a choice of a government run “public option”.
Those systems are based on the 100+ year old model created by Otto von Bismarck. They work well and much more cheaply than ours does. The plans proposed by Biden, Klobuchar, Buttigieg and Bloomberg are similar to that model. Just today the usually well-informed Ali Velshi reported on the health care systems of other countries and claimed they were all single payer, Medicare for All systems.
There is no excuse for this kind of ignorance. The media has been misreporting on the issue of health care since the Clintons tried to reform it.
even worse, health care has been among the top voter issues for years now, according to polling data. Ie you’d think press would drill down more on topic instead of incessant “how will you pay for it” debate questions
Here is a link to the Belgian health care system. https://www.uakron.edu/dotAsset/fcb50f80-def3-468b-b4dc-0af21010134f.pdf