Bill O’Reilly on Obama’s Coverage

March 4, 2008

Just a few moments ago Brit Hume was speaking with Bill O’Reilly about tonight’s primary contests.

O’Reilly mentioned that the New York Times, due to its McCain-affair assertions, has damaged its reputation and will continue to suffer financially. (I doubt that can be ascertained from these current events; they just may galvanize a like-minded support base).

He noted NBC’s affinity for Obama, while brining up the Saturday Night Live treatment as well. He cited a statistic: that Obama’s news coverage has been 83% positive. He seems to think that these things will lead to a Clinton resurgance.

He described NBC’s supposed favoritism as “corrupt.” He qualified that by stating that, if NBC is going to be supportive of Obama, they should come right out and say so.

The media, of course, doesn’t have a political angle. Doesn’t O’Reilly know that?

Advertisements

American Media ♥ Barack

March 1, 2008

The suspicion that Barack Obama is getting comparatively favorable media coverage is coming into discussion.

Media Expert Decries Campaign Coverage

The article references this Saturday Night Live skit:

THE SKIT

This is, of course, a topic of great interest to this blog. I often wonder what is behind media bias, real or perceived. MSNBC, for example, has been accused of being Obama’s loudest cheering section (SNL apparently agrees). Is it because they have an ideological affinity for him? Is it because there is some economic incentive for them to cover him more favorably?

Is it even the case that he is receiving better treatment? If so, we can agree that it is something very significant. We would need some means of determining the particular bias in each news source we encounter. Lacking that, we would be nothing but suspicious of our largest news outlets.

What responsibility does the media have? Should they come out and tell us what their angle is…or do we expect that they shouldn’t have one?