Why does the media seem to want Kerry so badly?

[Kazak]

I find it a little disturbing.

And, what is the smear going to look like?

:scared:

[blm]

1. They HAVE to report he won. For months they declared his candidacy dead.

In SPITE of the media he won in Iowa and proved them wrong.

btw...Were you complaining when the media perception that he was dead for so long dried up Kerry's fundraising and benefitted other campaign coffers?

[buckeye1]

9. Well blm,

Your faith has paid off. I voted Clark yesterday. Disappointed this am. As always,ABB! Here is wishing Kerry well and you too.

[blm]

12. Don't think I don't sympathize with you...I do.

Watching Clark be marginalized in the media the last few weeks is not much different than what Kerry and Edwards endured.

Being labeled "dead" and "irrelevant" doesn't help with poll numbers or fundraising. I despise the corporate media.

It is crystal clear to me what they are tried to do. Rove didn't want to face anyone where his Vietnam era service and military leadership would be questioned outright.

The people of Iowa and NH forced the media to retool with Kerry. Clark's win in Oklahoma will also force them to take him seriously.

[library_max]

2. The media doesn't "want" Kerry any more than they "wanted" Dean.

The media mostly reports the horserace aspect of any political contest (who's ahead and by how much), and they like to predict the winner in advance if they can. They're going to give a lot of exposure to anyone they think is winning. That's all it is.

[elfwitch]

7. I agree...

They aren't giving him any harder of a time than they did Dean. He is the dog in front. He is the one they are going to talk about the most and go after whenever they can. It would happen to anyone in the lead.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

3. If the media truly wanted Kerry...

He wouldn't have been on the carton of milk up until the Iowa primary. The guy was MIA for a very, very long time and sprung up out of nowhere. The media did not do that, but now they have to make up for lost time in not covering him, as a lot of people have a lot of questions. The smear will probably be ugly, but don't blame the media for actually reporting on the front runner.

[THUNDER HANDS]

4. the honest reason

because you want to believe that they do.

[Kazak]

11. I don't mean to disparage the man...

I mean, if he goes on to win the nom...he's got my vote. I'm just as ABB as the next guy. All I'm sayin' is if Kerry wins...mu fu had better win in Nov.

[Skip Intro]

5. You are experiencing your part of a mass hallucination

Only a few, mostly Kerry supporters as far as I can tell, appear to be unaffected.


The media merely report, they do not spin events, or attempt to shape the news. Dean really is angry, and the "scream" did deserve to be replayed 700 times in less than a week just before NH. Wes Clark does recieve his fair share of coverage. And John Kerry's middle name actually is "Electability."

Get some rest, and drink plenty of fluids. Everything is fine.

[meisje]

21. What planet are you on???

"The media merely report, they do not spin events, or attempt to shape the news."

Talk about a Hallucination

[Taeger]

35. It was sarcasm ;-)

[nannygoat]

6. David Podvin has an interesting article about

why the media sabotaged Dean...

The Scream
http://makethemaccountable.com/podvin/media/040201_TheScream.htm

<snip>
On December 1, 2003, Howard Dean was ahead by twenty points in the polls when he appeared on Hardball with Chris Matthews and said, “We're going to break up the giant media enterprises.” This pronouncement went far beyond the governor’s previous public musings about possibly re-regulating the communications industry, and amounted to a declaration of war on the corporations that administer the flow of information in the United States.

It was an extraordinarily noble and dangerous thing to do: when he advocated a truly free press, Dr. Dean was provoking the corrupt media conglomerates that control what most Americans see and hear and read, and thereby control what most Americans think.

The media giants quickly responded by crushing his high-flying campaign with the greatest of ease. This time, they didn’t even have to invent a scandal in order to achieve the desired result; merely by chanting the word “unelectable” at maximum volume, the mainstream media maneuvered Democratic voters into switching their support to someone who poses no threat to the status quo.

John Kerry is a member in good standing of the feeble Daschle/Biden/Feinstein wing of the Democratic Party, a group of politicians whose disagreements with the mercantile elite tend to be merely rhetorical. Any doubts about Kerry’s level of commitment to his stated progressive beliefs were conclusively answered in 1994 when he proclaimed himself “delighted” with the Republican takeover of Congress. The media oligarchy knows that a general election race between Kerry and George W. Bush will insure a continuation of its monopoly, regardless of who wins.

[rog]

10. This is a very good article, and part of his series ...

... on the media.
http://makethemaccountable.com/podvin/media/index.htm

Specifically, this one.

The Liar Of Record
http://makethemaccountable.com/podvin/media/031208_TheLiarOfRecord.htm

.rog.

[blm]

14. Podvin's a moron. Kerry filed a Sen. resolution against the FCC last Sept.

He said he would file it last June and do so based on legislation protecting small businesses. Corporate watch was behind him all the way.

Shortly after, Dean ended up with a press plane and was on the cover of 2 national mags in July and he has had 5 more covers right before the primary.

It is EVER more likely that Dean was promoted for most of last year to mute Kerry and dry up his fundraising. Thus, his candidacy was declared "dead" for months.

Let's see Podvin argue differently, the Know-nothing horse's ass that he is.

Podvin is so STUPID that he never even knew that it was Kerry who uncovered BCCI and IranContra and CIA drugrunning. Kerry found Ollie North and Podvin is too dumb to know this?

Sheesh. People LISTEN to that idiot?

Killer Stock tip:
Buy Podvin for what he knows, then sell him for what he THINKS he knows.

[Name removed]

32. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Straight Shooter]

8. I'm sick of campaign "buzz words"

Where did this word "electability" first pop up, and when? I don't remember this in Gore v. bush.

With Gore the buzz words were "serial fibber," right? Why is it the Republican party can start a buzz word and within 24 to 48 hours it's on everyone's lips, but for some reason the Dems can't get the buzz words "misleader" and "miserable failure" to get off the ground with regard to bush?

The media is the echo chamber. I suspect with John Kerry, the buzz word will be "shifty." Actually, I rather agree with that. And I want Dean supporters to start using the buzz words "family man" for Dean. (The problem with his son was minor, but Dean did what he had to do right away to take care of it. At least the press knows that children cannot be an issue, since the Tequila Twins would provide plenty of fodder.)

[xultar]

13. Very good question.

[RichM]

15. Because he's unthreatening to the Establishment, & won't raise any

questions that strike directly at their interests. For one example among many: Kerry won't say that the war was simply a scheme by US corporations to seize control of Iraq's oil; to convert Iraq into a huge US military base; & to gain the added bonus of the reconstruction-contract ripoff game. He can't say that -- because he voted for the thing himself, & because he's an Establishment politician who wouldn't dare blow the whistle on how corporate desires control US foreign policy.

Rather, Kerry will obediently keep the criticism SAFE and NARROW. He'll say the war was ill-conceived, the president didn't "keep his promises" to Kerry, the president "misled" us about the war. He'll make feisty critical-sounding comments about the "special interests" -- without ever naming them. This way, he'll SOUND like an "opponent" & critic of Bush, but the essential criminality of the whole scheme will be safely excluded from the discussion. Bush will come off as guilty of "errors in judgement" but not of criminality, and the military-corporate role will escape scrutiny altogether.

This is the crux of the matter: whichever party wins, it is essential (from the viewpoint of the media, who are part of the ruling elite) that:
1) the US corporate elite not be portrayed as profoundly & thoroughly corrupt
2) the US political system be portrayed as functioning legitimately, honorably, and fairly; and
3) the domestic credibility of the US government must not be shattered. (If this happens, it's an invitation to "social unrest" -- aka angry uprisings by masses who finally see they've been robbed).

Right now, the system sees the need for someone who appears to oppose Bush, but whose opposition is narrow enough that it won't threaten the underlying workings of the system. That's Kerry. // The system can afford to throw Bush to the wolves, if it needs to. It can't afford to have the underlying truth about itself exposed.

[Kazak]

16. Ah ha!

Now that makes sense...and that was sort of the sense I was gettin' too.

Oh well...ABB...right?

[oasis]

20. "what's the smear going to look like?" Were you refering to a media smear?

[Kazak]

23. I was wondering if...

the media pumping of Kerry might have to do with some smear tactics that they know the RW might have in store for us...

[oasis]

25. Then you don't agree with post #15? If Kerry's part of the "system" why

would they smear him?

[Kazak]

27. Not saying I don't agree...

I was wondering about both possibilities.

[oasis]

28. Thanks for clarifying. (eom)

[FubarFly]

22. No.

ABB removes any leverage the people have to broker change. If we want the Party to take our needs seriously, we have to speak to them in terms they will understand. There are terms and conditions which have to be met for my vote, money, and energy. I am prepared to withhold all three if the Party continues to treat progressives and progressive causes with contemptable disdain. I will not be cowed into submission by any threat, including the legitimate prospect of a b*sh reselection, because I know that if I fail, the Democratic Party will continue with it's merger unhindered, and I will be left to face the stark reality of one Party (Republican/Democratic) corporate rule.

[Taeger]

36. Nader's strategy

This was Ralph Nader's strategy. And I think the concept has sunk in.

This is one of the reasons I think It's GOOD to elect an outsider like Clark who hasn't been bargaining his soul to the devil for the last 20 years just to stay in office.

[mountebank]

33. RichM is right on! In one sense Kerry almost = Bush.

This is exactly the crux of the issue. Certainly Kerry is more liberal that George W. Bush. That is only one "political axis." Admittedly an important one, yes. But the other axis concerns power and governance by the elite or by the people. In this respect, Kerry is not dramatically different from Bush. The media and corporations are opportunistic. When it comes down to it, they don't really care who governs, left or right, so long as it's the elite and not the people. They can dump Bush in a heartbeat and slip into Kerry like a tailored suit.

[agingdem]

17. I think...

the media was pushing Dean with alot of help from the Bushies. Dean has now imploded (could be wrong!), Kerry has come back from the dead (media pronounced him DOA, though he was always very much alive), and Georgie is looking more and more like the idiot he truly is, the pack of jackels look like know-nothings.

[Ripley]

18. Try to stay awake when he speaks...

That should give you a clue how many people will get up off the couch or leave work early in order to vote.

[CWebster]

19. In the same way they whitewash all investigations

They are propping up the same product, differant brand label so that in the case that either brand wins, their brands don't matter if the media's interests are protected. Scratch my back...

[lyonn]

47. CWebster, what was your post

that described a meeting between the press sometime around Oct. - Nov. where Kerry met with approx. 20 newsmedia people to map a strategy? Would like to find that site again. That was very troubling to me. Talk about being bought and paid for? How can anyone get that many important people from the main media to meet with them at one time?

[zwielicht]

48. wow, link anyone??

[paulk]

24. I disagree with your basic assumption

that the media "seems to want Kerry so badly". I've seen very little this campaign cycle to support this. What are you basing this on?

The smear will come from every direction; every angle. The coming attack from the Republican's will be the most negative campaign ever seen.

[Taeger]

37. Talking heads

It comes from watching all the Republican talking heads praise Kerry. When those millionaire creeps praise a LIBERAL, it sends shivers down my spine.

Remember, in their book liberals are EVIL. They are psuedo-communists. If a Faux news analyst (the network is 100% GOP run top to bottom) praises a Massachusetts liberal, there is something SERIOUSLY WRONG!!!!!!

The same people who are praising Kerry are BASHING CLARK simply because he refused to comment on a statement by Michael Moore. Now the media is buzzing about Bush's AWOL problem. They're still dissing Clark.

THEY ARE AFRAID OF CLARK!!!!!!

[mountebank]

39. Media's collective sigh of relief.

In addition to numerous examples of the media - especially the talking heads - favoring Kerry, there was also the less tangible "sigh of relief" feeling in their coverage. Hard to document, but quite obvious to me.

[blondeatlast]

26. It'll be good for their business; as it will be a real battle

between Kerry and *it*.

Edit: typos

[TheWebHead]

29. because a close race

makes for higher ratings... Kerry has highest overall approval and matches up best against Bush in polling, and he's most likely to win. Why would they waste their time reporting on also-rans going forward?

[DianeK]

30. i think it is clear

the media desparately would like kerry to win this nomination because big business owns the media and there has never been a better friend to big business than bush. they know that a debate between kerry and bush would take all the meaningful issues off the table because kerry is vulnerable in virtually all of them ...no matter what the media is telling us, kerry can not beat bush because he can not speak out credibly against bush's policies when he supported them

[Kazak]

31. Which is sort of what I was getting at...

with the smear question.

[zwielicht]

34. full ack: no matter what the media is telling us, kerry can not beat bush

in fact, he is the one will be the easiest to attack as soon as he has the nomination - on his personality, issues, background, .....

if he really wins, the certain fast turnaround of the media on kerry at least will show some more people how blatantly they are lied at, and how much strategy is behind each and every word spoken in mass media. but thats not worth 4 more years of this shit. even if it sounds extremly exagerrated, i (as a european) think humankind can be saved or committed to suicide in this election.

on edit: spelling (i know, its still bad english - hope you're understanding me anyway)

[mountebank]

38. Kerry can win. Media-corporations have no loyalty.

Kerry can win because he doesn't threaten the power structure. And fortunately, although he's about the same as Bush in this respect, he is much more liberal.

It's a mistake, I think, to believe that the power structure is right wing and that they will turn on Kerry. Kerry is part and parcel of the power structure. He's the left wing of it, so to speak.

[zwielicht]

42. well, they have loyalty to the status quo

and i do not think that bad of kerry that i think he would be their choice. you may still be right, thinking of people like george soros who think that bushs "primitive form of social darwinism", as he put it in an interview today, has to be transformed into a less primitive form, for the status quo and their evil business to continue.

on edit: lol, i didn't notice your avatar is darwin! no offense to him intended

[zwielicht]

44. forgot 2 more points why they would certainly fight hard against kerry too

- murdoch is 100% pro-bush
- more war means more business (and spectacle for the media, as mad as that is)

[mountebank]

45. Democrats and Republicans love war.

I see your point re: Murdoch, but I think idealogues like him are really the exception. The real media bias is toward the status quo, officialdom, and power. Democrats have had their wars too that fed the military industrial complex. This particular war, I admit, was a right-wing construct. Who knows what wars Kerry would have, but I suspect he would have them.

Charles Darwin rolls over in his grave when Social Darwinism is mentioned, I am sure! :)

[oasis]

40. Bush has the lowest approval numbers since he took office. Americans

are fed up with the little chimp. Kerry is their best alternative.

[paulk]

46. why is there so much hand wringing

over how "vulnerable" Kerry is to attack?

Bush is a known quantity, unlike election 2000. He's the one vulnerable to attack. He's the worst president we've had since Warren Harding. Bush is a paper tiger. Rove is a dumb hick from Podunk, Texas. C'mon, people! Buck up!

[TexasSissy]

41. He's been around a long time & is respected & generally liked.

The media pundits have interviewed Kerry many many times over the last 20 or so years. They know him. It's as simple as that, I believe.

Plus they also view him as a serious, mainstream candidate. He's proven over 20 years that he has the stuff to make it politically. And he handles the media very well. He's very polite, etc., etc., but responds to criticism.

I'm not a Kerry supporter, but this is my take on it. And this is good news. Maybe this means they won't give him the hard time they gave Gore.

[zwielicht]

43. so why don't they endorse clark too, then? (nt)

nt

[Democat]

49. The media loved Dean for months, but once he lost, he was old news

Dean was the choosen one for many months, but his support didn't translate into real votes when he needed them.