Ezra Klein - Is the media biased against Bernie Sanders?
Very interesting and nuanced piece on a subject matter that does not lend itself to nuance. There is the media's bias towards so-called serious candidates versus the media's bias toward promoting a close, contested race in order to generate ratings. In California, for a change, primary turnout is expected to break records since both the Democratic and Republican primaries are contested. Personally, being from California, it is exciting that to be a pivotal state. We are the largest State, yet the California primary is seen as nothing more than a coronation of a nominee who has locked up the nomination.
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opinion/is-the-media-biased-against-bernie-sanders/ar-BBrtYtC?ocid=spartanntp
Is the media biased against Bernie Sanders?
His supporters certainly think so. Hundreds of them recently picketed CNN, and I'm regularly deluged by emails from Bernie backers who feel the press — including Vox — is biased against their candidate.
I think there are ways in which the media tilts against Sanders, and that some of the reasons for that bias exist primarily as subtext, rather than text, which makes coverage of the candidate confusing for anyone reading it. That said, there are also important ways in which the media tilts toward Sanders and against Hillary Clinton.
The past few days offered good examples of all these dynamics. But they also spoke to deeper realities — realities that we don't often discuss — about the way the media covers all presidential candidates, and how the models that shape media narratives are often invisible to the public.
= new reply since forum marked as read
facts seem to annoy some Hillary supporters so much.
No, I cannot tell a lie. I'm not the least bit sorry facts annoy some people. 
In 2015, TV news coverage of Trump:Clinton:Sanders was about 20
:1 (where the 1 is rounding up from 0.4). This is why Trump is where he is today. This is why Sanders despite the enormous crowds he was attracting, the money he was raising, and his constant rise in the poll still had shockingly low name recognition as the campaigns started.
Even right now, the TV shows anything Trump does in full, and I can see right now how the NY media (it was obvious today on NY1, owned by Time-Warner) does not give the Sanders campaign coverage nearly equal in time to Clinton's, or allow Sanders or his surrogates the same time to speak.
The pretense of sophisticated analysis can hide the obvious. "Bias" is first of all structural, top-down, and ideological. Does Klein talk about ownership? Who gets hired? Who gets promoted? These affect ideological direction over the middle term at the latest. How are the terms and issues are defined in the first place? How did it turn out that status-quo conservatives like himself and M. Yglesias seriously get to be depicted as though they were on the liberal (i.e., left) side of the acceptable spectrum of discourse?
along with many stories about the Tyndall Report and about media coverage of Bernie, some of which are also cited in that post, say yes, media has given Bernie a raw deal. Some Hillary supporters will deny that to the death, though.
Response to TomCADem (Original post)
