remember that time wright was looped 24/7 for 3 months straight? well..

[meow mix]

the media is saying hill lost because they were so unfair to her, LOL ROFFL!

spin away!

[babylonsister]

1. Unreal. The m$m actually had the balls to say Obama got more

favorable press than Clinton during that time period. I sincerely doubt that, but they're also spinning away.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

2. was it Pew that researched the weight of the words

from MSM? and found no major difference between to coverage given both?

[babylonsister]

3. There's been so many studies, I don't know who said what. But

having watched the coverage, Obama caught hell for weeks. No one can convince me he had more favorable coverage.

Edit to add this:

More Believe Press Showed Bias in Favor of Obama During Primaries
By CQ Staff

More Americans believe the press showed a bias in favor of Illinois Sen. Barack Obama over New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton despite the fact that the controversies that plagued Obama during the campaign - like the furor over his ex-pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright - got far more attention than many other events during the primaries, according to a Pew Research Center report

Pew says that 38 percent of those surveyed believed the press favored Obama compared to 8 percent who said Clinton was the media favorite. Forty percent says there was no bias. Among Democrats alone, 35 percent saw a bias in favor of Obama while 10 percent saw it in favor of Clinton.

The perception of bias in favor of Obama came despite the fact that out of the top ten events of the campaign, as judged by how much voters said they were aware of each, four involved either the Wright controversy or the coverage of Obama’s remarks about “bitter” white working class Americans in small towns. Clinton’s gaffe about coming under sniper fire in Bosnia tied at number 10.

http://www.cqpolitics.com/wmspage.cfm?parm1=5&docID=news-000002890916

[ChairmanAgnostic]

4. agreed.

and then, there is this.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/9DqR7zis99I&hl=en"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/9DqR7zis99I&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

[babylonsister]

6. I added the Pew study in post above. Perception isn't reality in this case. nt

[Diamonique]

5. Compare & contrast

How long did the media pontificate on Wright-gate? Over a month.

How long did the media pontificate on sniper-gate? About a week.

ETA: And which of these instances really showed us something about the candidate?

[ChairmanAgnostic]

7. wait, wait let me guess!

er, door number 3?

[MonkeyFunk]

8. No, I don't remember that

24/7 for three months straight?


Nope... don't remember that. I remember it was in the news, though.

[dkf]

9. What, in the news for 2 minutes. lol.

Studies show that it got way more play than any negative news on Hillary.

[chascarrillo]

11. You must live a very sheltered life. I am officially jealous of you.

[ecstatic]

10. I guess FOX News was excluded from the study?

EVERY single time I turned to that station, H&C were devoting ENTIRE shows to bashing him. Were they just recovering to coverage without regard to whether it was positive or negative coverage???

[Patsy Stone]

12. Still

They're still doing it.

[iconicgnom]

13. There's no doubt of one thing. McCain has gotten a free ride.

The Obama/Hillary contest is old news, irrelevant news. Time to focus on the main event.