Problem! Nedra Picklers biased AP reporting will be a thorn in both our candidates in the GE

[angie_love]

How is this partisan hack able to get away with consistently attacking our democratic candidates and pass it off as "neutral" reporting? This is a problem for us. She consistently writes negative stories about dems and no one calls her out on it. Unbelievable!

Pickler’s tic is a source of amusement, but it also has quite serious ramifications. While most discussion of media bias focuses on elite outlets like The New York Times and The Washington Post, stories put out by The Associated Press form the backbone of national political coverage in the small- and medium-sized newspapers whose combined circulations far exceed the majors. These early campaign reports, moreover, set the larger story line that constrains later coverage of events. Once Al Gore got the “liar” label on the 2000 campaign trail, he was unable to shake it no matter how unfair the charges were or how much worse Bush’s behavior was. This is a movie we’ve all seen before, and it doesn’t have a happy ending.

Even though I don't support Hillary, I thought Nedras raining on Hillarys parade was despicable.

The most recent example of her biased reporting includes "Clinton Wins, Now what?

WASHINGTON (AP) - Congratulations, Hillary Rodham Clinton. You did what your husband said you had to do and won Ohio and Texas.

Now what?

``Tonight we won three out of four contests and began a new chapter in this historical campaign,'' the victorious Clinton told reporters on her campaign plane.

But even if she wins every contest left, Clinton still would have a hard time overcoming Barack Obama's pledged delegate lead. In fact, her task got even harder because even though she won Texas, Ohio and Rhode Island Tuesday night, she didn't do much to close the delegate gap - and with every contest that passes, the number up for grabs drops."


Reading her Wiki page, I found this:

"Pickler married Eric Conner, who works for Fox News, on November 24, 2007. <6> She first met him in 2006 while on a trip to Mexico covering President George W. Bush

In covering the 2008 election, Pickler again came under scrutiny for her coverage of the Democratic candidates, particularly Barack Obama. A March 27, 2007 article written by Pickler entitled "Is Obama All Style and Little Substance?" was attacked for its claim that Obama had "delivered no policy speeches and provided few details about how he would lead the country" in his campaign up to that point.<11> The liberal media watchdog group Media Matters for America countered by pointing out that Obama had given numerous policy speeches on Iraq<12>, Israel<13>, health care<14>, and other topics.<15> In February 2008, Pickler again came under criticism after she wrote an article in which she detailed Republican charges that Barack Obama is unpatriotic. Her only source was Roger Stone, a Republican consultant notorious for, among other things, founding a non-profit organization named "Citizens United Not Timid" to, quote, "educate the American people about what Hillary Clinton really is" (the significance of the group, obviously, resting on its initials).<16>

Her reporting was largely responsible for feeding the controversy surrounding Barack Obama advisor Austan Goolsbee's meeting with the Canadian consulate <17>, which had been first reported by CTV.<18> She broke the story on a memo suggesting that Goolsbee had reassured the Canadian government that Barack Obama's stance on NAFTA was "more about political positioning than a clear articulation of policy plans". The charge was denied in statements from both the Obama campaign and the Canadian government and Goolsbee has since stated that he believes the memo's assertions, particularly that Obama sought to strengthen labor and environmental standards in NAFTA, is completely consistent with the candidate's positions to date."



This is so unfair!!! As if we don't have enough challenges, we have a wingnut reporter whos supposed to be neutral doing the repugs dirty work for them

[screembloodymurder]

1. The AP has CIA handlers.

Until everyone realizes that no MSM can be trusted, we will be subject to the fascist propaganda.

[madokie]

7. and the worst it gets for 'em they more that will be true

back in the nixonian days we didn't believe anything reported that had AP on it and I still don't trust them. In fact I do trust that it will be propaganda passed as news, always was and always will be.

[papau]

2. Obamba/NAFTA flap Mr Goolsbee ignores his "pull out of NAFTA" comment - as does Obama - but

your larger point as to unfair media extends to Media on the left.

Buzzflash has turned itself into Obamaflash as it is smear Clinton 24/7 these days.

Currently a person writing as "P M Carpenter" on that site was angry about Hillary saying that "You all know that if we want a Democratic president, we need a Democratic nominee who can win the battleground states, just like Ohio. And that is what we've done. We've won Florida, Nevada, New Mexico, Arizona, Michigan, New Hampshire, Arkansas, California, New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Oklahoma and Tennessee." - calling it a "non sequitur" for Hillary to note that in the primaries she has won the "big" states, the "important" states, such as California and New York -- states, she goes on to say, that Democrats must carry in the general if they're to have any hope. The problem to this Obama fan being the implication that "she alone can win them in November". And of course the writer is correct that such an implication is wrong.

But, of course, Hillary does not imply that - she's only implying the reasonable thought that she'd have a leg up in those states compared to Obama.

But the the Buzzflash writer does not discuss the obvious backside of their thought - that almost all of Obama's caucus and red state wins mean nothing as to winning in November as those Red States are not about to change - and those small turnout only those that get time off from work caucuses are quite a bit less than democratic - they are just cheap and allow the party professionals to control their state - the very thing Obama and the Obama media decry as they claim super delegates are "just" party professionals - ignoring that those "super" folks in general represent the people better that the "elected" delegates as more than half of the supers are just Democrats that won much larger elections, primary and general, than any caucus delegate will ever stand for.

P m Carpenter claims Hillary is doing "underhanded, bullying", "retailing these insults to what passes for the multitudes' intelligence" -- But the writer does not realize that it is Buzzflash through the writer that is "underhanded, bullying", "retailing insults".


Somehow the idea that our primary/caucus/super delegate system has logic behind it - and that no part of it is to be considered the equivalent of a one person/one vote nationwide election - does not cross the writers head. Indeed I am certain the writer realizes disproportional delegates to black areas to reward them for past loyal voting for Dems was the reason Obama played the race card to move the vote split in those areas from post Iowa 70/30 to the current 90/10 - a doubling of the spread and all it took was acting like the Clintons were racists (the in control of supporters Obama line was dropped by Obama when his supporters went over the line 4 weeks later - but that was after the media and the black community had been sold on the need to bond against any "Uncle Tom"). And disproportional value of votes is not democracy - as can be seen by Hillary winning states but not winning the extra delegates you would expect.

[angie_love]

3. WTF are you talking about? I was defending Hillary and Obama

They are both democrats. Nedra will hurt them both against McCain in the fall. WHy do you have to make this one sided against Hillary, can't you come up from your blinders for one day and be a democrat instead of a Hillary fan?

[papau]

4. I saw a rant against media bias - guess you can't accept that it hits Hillary more than Obama

[angie_love]

6. This isn't about Hillary vs. Obama. Its about BOTH of them as democrats.

Will you get off your hillary ass kissing for one day to recognize her "reporting" as a problem for democrats in general? She smeared kerry in 2004, and now shes smearing our candidates again in 2008 and getting away with it. Wake up!

[Zorra]

5. She's a terrible "journalist". I recall her blatant anti-Kerry propaganda

in 2004.

I remember posting about her at that time.