NOW the Washington Post's ombudsman admits Edwards didn't get enough coverage

[antiimperialist]

She included Dodd, Richardson, Biden and Kucinich as those who didn't get enough coverage.

In a column today, the Washington Post's ombudsman Deborah Howell admitted,

Democratic readers have rightly complained that John Edwards didn't get the coverage he deserved. Bill Richardson, Joseph Biden and Christopher Dodd, all credible candidates, got next to no coverage. News organizations can't cover everyone all the time, but those candidates deserved more. Readers with Republican leanings have peppered me with e-mail about the lack of coverage of Ron Paul's campaign. His ability to raise money online and draw loyal supporters has brought him more coverage than I thought he'd get.

But my question is...did she say something to management? When she saw the injustice, when it was still early, did she raise objections?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/11/AR2008011103016.html?hpid=opinionsbox1

[hellbound-liberal]

1. Shouldn't she have waited until Edwards was out of the race too?

Now there's a chance that they might try to be more fair to him. :sarcasm:

[ileus]

2. Maybe Richarson, Biden, and, Dennis should hire Edwards. Kind of a mini class action suit.

[Armstead]

3. They always give mea culpas and then ignore what they promise

Remember how after 9-11, the media did a lot of on-air soul searching. "We've concentrated too much on fluff, and we ignored serious issues and international news too much. But 9-11 was a wake up call that we have to refocus on serious news. That's what we intend to do."

That lasted about two weeks, and then it was back to Paris Hilton. The international coverage they did do was so shallow and superficial that it enabled Bush to take us into a useless war.


They do the same after every election cycle too. "Well we did too much 'horse race' coverage, without actually covering the campaigns. We'll do better next time."

[Sarah Ibarruri]

4. Write them a letter: [e-mail] - tell them what you think

I did!

[MaineDem]

5. It's back to the "always easier to ask forgiveness" thing

Do what you want and then say "I was wrong." Too little too late.

Sad that the media has such power. But if you look at NH, the media was proved wrong. I love NH people!

[PATRICK]

This, only because

of public outrage directed to their editors. Meaningless mild apology which we have seen before and then go back to establishment business for the failed minority in Foggy Bottom.

If it effects their future coverage(if it helps hurt the Dem process in general they will) they might even change their ways but don't bet on it. Apology under pressure with continued blindness and self-justification does not imply conversion away from the farce they have become.

Money means more than voters, voice or truth. When consumers get mad, they soothe and protect their ratings as best they can as truth predators.

[kurth]

6. They'll give him more coverage now - negative coverage

So predictable.

[stopfascism]

7. It explains why Suckabee did so well in Iowa...

he got way to much media attention. I think it's a game with journalists called "What candidate do we want to popularize this week?" Build 'em up then tear 'em down or just ignore them until they fall off the face of the earth.

[ThoughtCriminal]

8. At this point in the campaign

hardly anybody has voted. I fail to see why ANY candidate should have preferential coverage.

[sam sarrha]

9. the covering of one side and the neglect of others is illegal campaign contributions..

[Triana]

10. Email Ms. Howell...

...email her HERE:

http://projects.washingtonpost.com/staff/email/deborah+howell/

_ _ _ _ _

Here's what I sent:
_ _ _ _ _

In this article:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/11/AR2008011103016.html?hpid=opinionsbox1

You wrote that John Edwards and Dodd, Biden and other candidates didn't get enough coverage and that the media was unfair to them.

A LOT of people have noticed this RE: Edwards. John Edwards won 2nd place in Iowa over Mrs. Clinton - though Edwards had much less money and media coverage.

The media, oddly, ignored that incredible accomplishment in favor of talking up the Obama/Hillary match - whilst practically ignoring the 2nd place winner - Edwards.

One might have thought that the talk would then have been all about Obama/Edwards than Obama/Clinton - but none such.

I spend a lot of time talking to people on and off the internet and believe me we've noticed the lack of or negative coverage of Edwards.

This is still very much a THREE-way race and we'd like to see it covered that way - rather than the media ignoring Edwards - possibly because their corporate owners don't like his anti-corporate message.

LET THE PEOPLE DECIDE - please - and stop trying to choose our candidates for us?

Tell your management about the lack of coverage for John Edwards.

DO something about it.

Telling US won't help. We can't change it.

YOU can.

Regards,