Anti-Clark media bias out of control!!

[Donny247]

I'm getting really frustrated with this bizarre media black-out of Clark. The last debate was clearly a strong performance for him, with most observers here, as well as Howard Fineman and Robert Novak, saying that Clark did very well. Then, you read the New York Times and Washington Post coverage of the debate, and he's barely mentioned, and when he is, it's in the context of his Iraq flip-flop. What gives???
Here we have a four star general and former Supreme NATO Allied Commander running for president in a presidential year that's supposed to be dominated by national security issues, and he gets about as much coverage as Dennis Kucinich!! Notice that you never hear the media whores say their old "Democrats need someone who would be a credible commander in chief" line since Clark got in the race? Something stinks.
What we need is something like the "Dean Defense Forces" for Clark. Every time some douche bag reporter unfairly goes after Clark, blast the prick with e-mails correcting their misinformation. Is there something like this already??

[Donna Zen]

1. Yes

Check on his website, clark04, in the CCN, there is a group called "letter writers for clark." Or, just do it.

[neuvocat]

2. What else can they do?

They have someone they can't bully or intimidate so all they can do is try their best to shut him out.

[Tom Rinaldo]

3. writers_for_clark

There is a group organized through Yahoo Clubs trying to do that. Here is part of a welcome message sent me by the group. I bet if you write you will be invited to join, or you can search for the club through Yahoo groups and join directly (I agree with your basic premise by the way):

"I've added you to my writers_for_clark group at Yahoo! Groups, a free,
easy-to-use email group service. As a member of this group, you
may send messages to the entire group using just one email address:
[e-mail]. Yahoo! Groups also makes it easy to
store photos and files, coordinate events, and more.

Here's a description of the group:
------------------------------------------------------------------------

We are committed to using the written word to spread Wesley Clark's
vision to every community in the nation, by writing letters to our
local newspapers and magazines, by serving as a rapid-response to news
organizations, and ultimately, to put Wesley Clark where he belongs
- in The White House!

"Democracy is about dialog, discussion, it's about disagreement. It's
about settling in rational discussion. It's not about name calling,
it's not about intimidation."
- General Wesley Clark, October 6, 2003"

[FrenchieCat]

4. The media is picking our candidate for us.....

and they are blatant about it. I write letters constantly. It does make a difference.

[Pastiche423]

5. No

We, the People are working w/our candidate to get him elected.

clark was touted as the white knight that was going to come storming into the race and rescue the country.

He din't and won't.

It takes organization, giving people the motivation to work towards a better country, allowing people to be part of the process, but most of all, giving people HOPE.

The above is what has achieved notice.

[Tinoire]

9. Do you want a real laugh Pastiche?

Check out this poll created Tuesday, September 23, 2003

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/special/president/quickvote/frameset.exclude.1.html

Nothing like being a tad bit obvious, is there?

Here's a direct link to the poll if you don't feel like voting

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/special/president/quickvote/vote.1.html

[Pastiche423]

12. Hmmm...

isn't there a name for that? I believe it begins w/a "F".

[FrenchieCat]

13. You will be proven wrong....

and then you wont be able to do anything about it.....

Laugh now, before the tears.

http://thedolphin.typepad.com/dolphin/2003/11/are_dean_democr_1.html

[Pastiche423]

16. I am saving this thread

to present to you in November 2004.

I will be proven correct.

[Name removed]

30. Deleted message

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

[neuvocat]

41. Ooh lookie! A fortune teller!

Please. You don't know who's going to get elected any more than anyone else. If you can do that, you can tell the weather too for the next 6 months out.

[Lefta Dissenter]

23. Let's see, if you set the bar high,

and after a few weeks you're only in second place (or first) in many polls, then you're a failure.

Set the bar low enough, and you're ALWAYS declared a winner. Do we really want a candidate who is following in the footsteps of bush? After the last debate, in which, I acknowledge, some of the candidates wasted their (and our) time bashing Dean, the analysis was that since Dean didn't make an ass of himself, he's the winner. Didn't we hear just the same analysis after the Gore/bush debates?

I really wish that the debates on tv and the debates on DU would compare policies and what these candidates would do for us, rather than piss and moan about which campaign manager might have made a wrong step, or whether Dean or Clark worded something wrong ten years ago.

I'm sick of hearing the contrived bullshit about Clark and Dean and all of the others. Get ON with nominating the person who can beat that piece of shit out of the White House!

[Demobrat]

6. Seems to me that Clark's been all over the talk show circuit.

He's on Blitzer tonight. No, he's not the lead story on the 6 o'clock news, but why should he be?

[Tom Rinaldo]

8. That's true enough

He does get slots on those shows. But whenever he is off camera the talk returns to "Too bad he entered the race so late" and ""those early mistakes cost Clark". Those are the sympathetic comments. Then when he isn't on a show, and the pundits discuss the race, they literally ignore him if they aren't actively dismissing him. Clark is not an also ran, he is consistently at or near the top of polls, but it is rarely cited that he runs best against Bush for instance (sometimes it is Dean who does well in those polls, true, but they discuss him when he does).

[maggrwaggr]

7. I agree, they're scared to death of him

The media likes Bush. They would love another war. War means good ratings, people glued to their TV's night and day.

They know Bush can beat Dean, so they're promoting Dean.

Seems pretty obvious to me after the "debates". I love Dean, but he didn't even get a chance to say much, it was obvious that Clark dominated the debate.

Clark's the guy that can demolish Shrub, and they know it.

[PROGRESSIVE1]

31. Agreed!

Der media whores are pushing for Bush to get another term.

The worse bias of course are the Cable "News" Whores and The "Librul" Washington Post.

Watch the evening news, PBS, Nightline, and the BBC!

[drfemoe]

10. reality check

Searched news for wesley clark. Results 1 - 10 of about 5,020. Search took 0.09 seconds
http://news.google.com/news?q=wesley+clark&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&sa=G&edition=us&scoring=d

[poskonig]

11. Wesley Clark is not a religion.

No, the General is not a messiah, and you are not persecuted "chosen ones."

Other campaigns have lost the media spin several times, including Bush. Working the media effectively and framing the terms of discussion is part of the game.

[FrenchieCat]

17. Keep your head in the sand...

with your myopic rational. If you don't remember this media, the one that encouraged the impeachment of Clinton, that took us to war, that gave Bush the election, than you would know that the spin is in...and it's not to benefit any other candidate other than Bush.

You can be in denial, but when you are weeping over your chair at your Place of gathering on election night, Please remember that you will be weeping from a self inflicted giant and unreversable fatal wound. But worse, the entire world we also suffer.

[poskonig]

20. I touched a nerve, eh?

You point out the media has a sensationalist bias. Big deal.

I'd be happy with Clark or any of the other candidates when compared to Bush. And if the Democrats lose, I get to re-evaluate the Democratic and Republican parties and see what fresh faces and ideas they present in 2008. So spare me the nonsense about the coming apocalypse.

[FrenchieCat]

24. The only nerve you touched....

will be your own.....

Yes, I do consider it an apocalypse if we lose this election.
Don't you?

[poskonig]

26. No, I do not.

Like the Democratic party, there are Republican ideas I support and ideas I do not support. I do not like Bush's transfer of taxation from wealth to labor, nor his moronic foreign policy, and would prefer to see him gone.

But it isn't like tax cuts mean the world is going to end.

[glarius]

14. When CNN discusses the leading candidates Clark is almost never mentioned

They talk about Dean, Gepbhart, Kerry....but it's as if Clark isn't there....This makes me think he is the one they are afraid of...

[poskonig]

15. Clark is not ahead in a *single* primary state.

Clark is not in play in Iowa nor New Hampshire, and is even losing to Edwards in South Carolina.

[FrenchieCat]

21. Actually Clark is not losing in SC.....

You are looking at the wrong poll. But besides that, I would think that the fact that he comes closest to beating Bush in all of the polls since Clark started to run would be one of the most important issue that would be discussed during "election 2004"...if we had an honest media...not who is winning in Iowa and New Hampshire only. but the media is not discussing it. Why is that?. Do you wonder why, or do you just not care?

As you know that the media is dishonest...as have been witnessed for the last several years, what would make you think that they would now have Democrat's best interest at heart?

Just keep watching and try to be objective and you will see that all of us who have posted our observation thus far are not imagining what is going on. If you don't take the time to really check out what we are saying, you are then just being dishonest with yourself, which I would hope is not a choice that you would normally make.

[poskonig]

22. Evidence smevidence.

Only media coverage, facts, et cetera, that put Clark in a positive light are supposedly truthful. :eyes:

Wesley Clark is a great guy, but he is not a religion.

[drfemoe]

28. Read that again

It isn't that he isn't "winning" in IA and NH, he isn't even RUNNING in those elections. This is the primary.
The candidates who are in the primary elections will get more coverage than those who aren't.

[Tom Rinaldo]

32. Uh, Clark is running in NH

He has campaign offices there. I volunteered at one one day. You weren't trying to prove the point of this thread, were you?

[drfemoe]

34. Ok so he isn't running in IA

same POINT. which you ignore offering only a personal attack on me.

[Tom Rinaldo]

37. Come on, I wasn't attacking you

Really I wasn't. You were pointing out that Clark can not be expected to get media coverage because he is not running in Iowa and New Hampshire, which are the first two contests. Currently according to the most recent poll Clark is running third in NH (a distant third true, after Dean and Kerry, but ahead of Gephardt and Edwards and Lieberman). Yeah, I admit I made a minor dig at you, but that wasn't an attack, it was completely on topic. I assume you are following the media and you seemingly did not know that Clark is running in NH, and campaigning actively there after a late start.

It is not at all the same point to say Clark is not running in Iowa,as opposed to not running in both Iowa and NH, hence he is not getting as much coverage as those who are. By running in NH Clark is actively competing in one of the two elections that are most actively being tracked at the moment. Iowa and NH traditionally collectively represent the start of the decision making phase. Had Clark skipped both, your point would have been valid, but he didn't. You may have other valid arguments against the premise of this thread, it's just that the one you presented, the way you presented it, was flawed. It's not an attack to point that out.

[sleipnir]

18. Media Blackout? Where have you been?

Clark just got some major press announcing he was involved (indirectly) with Waco!! That's some PR you just can't get off the street! Yea for the major coverage of Clark!

Sarcasm is on here...I understand your point entirely...

[chaska]

33. That yahoo article title was misleading...

and was changed due to protest from Clarkies. It should have read "Clark not directly involved".

[rumguy]

19. I really feel that the media is afraid of Clark

They saw how he handed Asman his ass on Faux...

He doesn't fit easily into their game plans...he flips the script on 'em....

[FrenchieCat]

27. Unfortunately,

I believe that the supporters of other candidates will refuse to see this bias against Clark.

They are so bent on winning a nomination that the general election has become only a second thought.

The analogy on the the General Election is , we'll cross that bridge when we get there.....problem is there may be no bridge when it's time to cross.

[AP]

25. The media said Dean won that debate!

Personally I thought that Sharpton won it be slapping Brokaw on the Tawana Brawley question. And Clark was the biggest improvement and I know a lot of people were really impressed. However, Dean definitely didn't win that debate and he hasn't won any in my opinion.

But, when Susan Paige and everyone else said Dean won, it reminded of, well, how Susan Paige said Bush beat Gore in the debates.

[Padraig18]

29. I think we all tend to perceive...

... what we want to perceive about media coverage/bias. Frankly, I watch the news virtually all day, unbless I'm listening to news radio, and I haven't noticed a lack of couverage about Gen. Clark (who is my #2 choice, btw--- so I don't dislike him, or wish him ill).

[AP]

36. It's not just quantity of news coverage...

...and I do believe that since he announced, the quantiit of news coverage has dropped significantly and it's not in proportion to the significance of his presense in the race.

It's also the quality of news coverage.

My unscientific analysis is that coverage of Clark tends to skew towards UPSETTING his campaing themes. His strengths are converted to weaknesses. Intelligence is converted to connivance. Ambition is converted into hunger for power, etc. After you're done listening to a story about Clark, you're left thinking less of him.

Dean coverage tends to affirm the qualities that make him more attractive to his supporters.

[Padraig18]

39. That's possible.

I can't confirm or deny it; my own observation here at least (in IL), is that his coverage has been largely positive.

:hi:

[AP]

40. I consider this the archetypal Clark smear:

http://www.npr.org/features/feature.php?wfId=1468300

Critics Debate Clark's Military Record
All Things Considered audio
Oct. 16, 2003

Presidential candidate Wesley Clark releases his impressive military resume Thursday. Clark was first in his class at the U.S. Military Academy, a decorated Vietnam veteran, and commanded the 1999 NATO bombing of Kosovo and peacekeeping operations afterward. However, his critics from his military days see him as an opportunist. NPR's Eric Westervelt reports.

[chaska]

35. A little bit of good news!

There is a long and very positive review of Clark's 'Winning Modern War' in the current issue of The Nation.

I read the article at the library ... where, in the parking lot, there was a Miata with a big Clark campaign sign behind the windshield. Damn, that felt good to see. I left the driver a note of thanks.

Good article: http://www.ospolitics.org/usa/archives/2003/11/26/how_i_beca.php

[FrenchieCat]

38. Here is an earlier link....basically the media was then operating

under the same meme. At that time, Clark was ahead in some of the national polls and still.......the bias was evident. Read it and see what was said then and tell me what you think now.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=706934&mesg_id=706934