The media failed Americans during the '04 election.

[BUSHOUT]

I can put up with losing.
But the one thing that keeps coming back and bothering me is how the media failed so miserably this election.

Let's take a couple exampes:

The 87 Billion voted for and then against.

We all know how this was jumped on by the republicans. It was made a centerpiece of their campaign and never put asside even after the "flip-flop" attack eased off.
I knew that the vote Kerry made against 87 Billion had other aspects to it and the vote had nothing to do with not wanting to support the troops. It was a principled vote which attempted to bring attention to some important issues.
What happened? It was as if the media just decided that this was a Bush talking point, and it would be allowed to proceed without question. Sure, democratic spokespersons explained it to the media on occasion, but they mostly ignored the explanation and kept showing footage of republicans smirking about Kerry not funding the troops....without question.

The missing explosives.

The media tried avoid, but finally couldn't avoid, a story about 300+ tons of missing explosives. The obvious conclusion that at least a sizable amount the explosives were missing AFTER the invasion started was seemingly locked onto by Aaron Brown (of all people) through some simple obvservations on his late night show. This conclusion was ignored by the rest of the media and the republican denials and protests over the timing of the dissappearance continued unchallanged.
The media even let republicans at the highest levels make comparisons between the 300+ tons of high-grade explosives and the supposed 400,000 tons of other "minutions" the've already found in Iraq. The media was to lazy...or kind...to point out that the IAEA had singled out the Al-Qaqaa site before and after the war and this was a closely monitored site due to the powerful nature of these explosives. They can't be compared to 400,000 tons of rusty 10 year old shells and tanks and orginary munitions found around the country. Yet that's what they did and the media let them.

CheneyGate.

The media allowed Lynne Cheney to dictate the news to them following the third debate. Suddenly a Jerry Springer-type reaction by a woman who isn't even running to a minor comment by a presedential candidate is news. Dick chimed in the next day when he realized the non-story had legs and would hide the fact another debate was lost.
Nevermind that in the same debate George Bush had explicitely said he allows God to control his foreign policy. Nevermind everything else that was talked about in the debate....many issues in which John Kerry made excellent points explaining the direction he would take the nation and the record of the last four years was examined. Forget all that, it's not relavent. Lynne Cheney blew a minor fuse. Almost threw a chair. I feel a Scott Peterson coming on.

Anyway. That's three quick areas I noticed the media acting almost inexplicably. It's sell sell sell I guess....they're not paid to give us the truth they're paid to stop us from turning the channel.
To bad. Part of me will forever be idealistic and wish we had an intelligent media willing to spend a few extra bucks and time to dig a little. They've got to stop allowing partisan hacks to lock horns and rattle off a litany of untruths without question.

The "87 Billion voted for/then against/didn't vote to fund troops" thing should have been ripped apart. One candidate was using it against another with effect, and we were never even treated to a solid explanation by the media....no accepted wisdom emerged from those charged with looking for one.

[BlueEyedSon]

1. It's the "Dumbassification of America"

Anyone who understands the legislative process would see through thos crap. Plus:

Bush Supporters Still Believe Iraq Had WMD or Major Program,
Supported al Qaeda

Agree with Kerry Supporters Bush Administration Still Saying This is the Case

Agree US Should Not Have Gone to War if No WMD or Support for al Qaeda

Bush Supporters Misperceive World Public as Not Opposed to Iraq War,
Favoring Bush Reelection

Even after the final report of Charles Duelfer to Congress saying that Iraq did not have a significant WMD program, 72% of Bush supporters continue to believe that Iraq had actual WMD (47%) or a major program for developing them (25%). Fifty-six percent assume that most experts believe Iraq had actual WMD and 57% also assume, incorrectly, that Duelfer concluded Iraq had at least a major WMD program. Kerry supporters hold opposite beliefs on all these points.

Similarly, 75% of Bush supporters continue to believe that Iraq was providing substantial support to al Qaeda, and 63% believe that clear evidence of this support has been found. Sixty percent of Bush supporters assume that this is also the conclusion of most experts, and 55% assume, incorrectly, that this was the conclusion of the 9/11 Commission. Here again, large majorities of Kerry supporters have exactly opposite perceptions.

These are some of the findings of a new study of the differing perceptions of Bush and Kerry supporters, conducted by the Program on International Policy Attitudes and Knowledge Networks, based on polls conducted in September and October.

Steven Kull, director of PIPA, comments, "One of the reasons that Bush supporters have these beliefs is that they perceive the Bush administration confirming them. Interestingly, this is one point on which Bush and Kerry supporters agree." Eighty-two percent of Bush supporters perceive the Bush administration as saying that Iraq had WMD (63%) or that Iraq had a major WMD program (19%). Likewise, 75% say that the Bush administration is saying Iraq was providing substantial support to al Qaeda. Equally large majorities of Kerry supporters hear the Bush administration expressing these views--73% say the Bush administration is saying Iraq had WMD (11% a major program) and 74% that Iraq was substantially supporting al Qaeda.

http://www.pipa.org/OnlineReports/Pres_Election_04/html/new_10_21_04.html

[Catherine Vincent]

2. This bumper sticker will always ring true:

"Liberal Media My Ass"

[BUSHOUT]

3. Oh yah, I forgot the "global test" lie also. The media licked that one up

the allowed us to be lied to repeatedly.

[rockedthevoteinMA]

4. all of the media in this country is owned by five men. (companies)

20 years ago it was owned by 50 men. Frightening isn't it? (Journalism student here - ONLY because I want to change the right slant to the media) :)

[seaveggie]

5. Tell your friends: Ignore the Corporate Media

Time to turn our backs on this bankrupt institution. Imagine a mass movement - millions of Americans - who simply shut them off. The MSM only exists to sell advertising space; if their ratings suffer, then they will need to address their shortcomings in some fashion.

The real issue is that, yes, they are owned by about 5 corporations, and because of the bottom line, they have taken the journalism out of the news, replaced with "infotainment". (Perhaps there's a larger concern, perhaps they are genuinely becoming a tool of the Right. But at the very least, their drive to the bottom line has killed any sincere analysis of the status quo.)

It's the biggest threat - no, it's no longer a threat, it's one of the main reasons our democracy is under attack. They manipulate our human drives (sex and hunger) with a mainline hook to create a nation of zombies. Think of it, we spend our money on poisons: Coke, Macdonalds, twinkies, cigarettes, drugs. They go after our kids, exploiting young minds who've yet to develop the skills to understand the manipulation (that's molestation in any other sane culture). It's unreal.

The only way out is to put them on a one big IGNORE. Tell your friends. Shut them out. Most people in this community probably already do.

[BUSHOUT]

6. Gotta demand truth at every turn.

That's all we can do. And complain loudly when we're failed.