US News & World Report: "Non-Fox cable networks" cheer Obama while ignoring teabaggers

[Amerigo Vespucci]

Media Cheers Obama, Ignores Tea Party Movement
No surprise to conservatives as big media blows off the tea party movement to cheer the president
By Paul Bedard
Posted April 13, 2010

By Paul Bedard, Washington Whispers

http://www.usnews.com/articles/news/washington-whispers/2010/04/13/media-cheers-obama-ignores-tea-party-movement.html

Big media, especially the TV networks, seem to be going out of their way to diss the conservative-leaning Tea Party movement as they work overtime to cheer on the Obama administration whose Gallup job approval rating has dropped to 43 percent, say conservative media critics who today are issuing a report that they say confirms suspicions that the mainstream media have got it wrong in their political coverage.

In their report provided to Whispers, the Media Research Center charges that the networks and much of the non-Fox cable have limited their coverage of the growing Tea Party Movement. And when they did cover the protests, the stories were laced with charges of racism and hate. Among the highlights:

* Total coverage by the networks was miniscule. ABC, CBS, and NBC aired 61 stories or segments about the Tea Party over a 12-month period despite the movement's demonstrated political force.
* By comparison, more liberal protests in the past won far wider and more positive coverage. For example, the Nation of Islam's "Million Man March" in 1995 was featured in 21 evening news stories on just the night of the march–more than the Tea Party received in all of 2009; and the anti-gun "Million Mom March" in 2000 was preceded by 41 broadcast network reports heralding its message with a dozen positive pre-march interviews with organizers and participants.
* Some coverage suggested Tea Party racism and extremism.
* The make-up of the Tea Party movement has been wrongly reported as a collection of angry white men when credible polling has shown that women are a big part of the protests and a quarter are Democrats with another 10 percent Independents.

[livetohike]

1. Yes, clowns wearing teabags on their hats and ears are

worthy of national coverage! "Demonstrable political force" - right.

[eShirl]

2. Good.

I guess the MSM is not as bad as I thought.

[PSPS]

3. A bogus Moonie-Times / Brent Bozell "analysis"

Already discussed and properly ridiculed here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8145452

[Supersedeas]

17. Yes, and thanks for the link -- CNN has practically converted to the TeaBagger network

[walldude]

4. Yeah those poor tea baggers just get no coverage

:eyes:

[ericinne]

5. A quarter of them Democrats?

A quarter of them Democrats? Like the chick who was on camera this summer claiming to be a Democrat, then it was later discovered she worked for the Republican campaign? Yeah, I bet 1/4th are Democrat. Just like 10% of them are fucking so called "independents".

[HughBeaumont]

6. Give me som-a that glue they've been huffing.

Faux News, CSpan, CNBC, CNN, etc . . . couldn't fall over themselves FAST enough to give full-day coverage to the 9/12 protest! They were treating it as if it were the second coming of the March on Washington, lying and putting attendance numbers on the same level with Woodstock and Obama's inauguration. All of these stations paraded these lunatics and their misspelled signs hour after hour. Glenn Beck was so proud at what he accomplished with these Chickens for Colonel Sanders.

Meanwhile, for 10 years in D.C. and other places, and usually without ANY mainstream media promotion whatsoever (unlike the Tea Klux Klowns, who have the luxury of a Dick Armey MSM pre-tour), anywhere from 30,000 to half a million made their anti-war voice heard at various dates in that period. We didn't care if it was cold, rain or sun, we were there.

And where was the "liberal media"? Nowhere to be seen. AT ALL. It was like it never happened.

[Cirque du So-What]

7. All you need to know about the agenda of Paul Bedard

can be summed up in a single sentence: 'Paul Bedard was the Washington Times White House correspondent from 1988 to 1998.'

Is USN&WR so hard-up for journalists that they must hire a RW flack away from the Moonie Times? Talk about the pot calling the kettle black where the so-called 'liberal media' is concerned!

[City Lights]

8. Puhleeze.

:eyes:

Would you like some cheese to go with your whine, Paul?

[goclark]

9. I thought that mag had more sense than that ~ what am I missing?

[progressoid]

18. They've been leaning right for a long time n/t

[BzaDem]

10. Obama's at 43 percent in Gallup? No.

The 52-weak low is right on Gallup's front page and it is 45%. They can't even get an honest first sentence.

[G_j]

11. Paul Bedard: RW propagandist

you are a liar

[SoCalDem]

12. Pictures don't lie, dude..

The whole teabag party thing is about racism. These people were not interested enough to vote for "their candidate" last November, and he lost..BIG

They could not wrap their brains around the fact that the ONE guy they had who "might" have beaten Obama was a Mormon, so they got tossed out of office.

They just were not all that interested in protesting before the election because they didn't like being called racists.

Once Obama became president, they felt comfortable enough to really get into protesting because "everyone criticizes a sitting president", and it was finally safe.

The can claim it's about taxes or policies, but their signs, rhetoric & demeanor all say it's about the fact that we have a black man who replaced their beloved white, godly, southern gentleman president.

he's smarter than their guy, he's friendlier than their guy, he's more popular with the rest of the world than their guy, and they cannot stand it.

[Bgno64]

13. TFB, Bedard

You want "balance?" Then let's bring back the Fairness Doctrine, shall we?

[LeftinOH]

14. My USNews&WR re-subscription included 'incentives' for discounts on Regnery Press publications-

-lots of RW punditry. I did not re-subscribe.

[OnyxCollie]

15. I was getting my oil changed yesterday.

As I sat in the waiting room, FOX News raged on the TV. (It's the only time I'm exposed to it.) It was nothing but tea party, tea party, TEA PARTY. They also attacked Rep. Alan Grayson for "spying" on some tea party meeting.

I had brought my laptop so I could do schoolwork while I waited. As the slime oozed out from the TV set, I was reading this:

Moreover, the functionary has power and speaks for others who have even greater power. The very fact that he alone can speak for the record in public shows his power. The constant hammering home of the same points does have a suggestive effect, not because the repetition "reinforces" the original stimulus (it often does the opposite), but because it demonstrates the power of the speaker and the powerlessness of the hearer. The end effect is often something like this: since it is obviously impossible to contradict, I had better not struggle against this all-powerful stream of communication; I shall accept it just for the record.

The device of forcing people to listen to official news and propaganda by setting up transmitters in public places greatly reinforces this effect. The Nazis used this technique. Communal loudspeakers were set up in German factories, offices, and restaurants where everybody had to listen to periodic broadcasts. Under the Soviets, forced listening reportedly has been developed to terrifying lengths: in an account published long before the war, we read:6

"Our hotel room in Leningrad faced upon an open square, where a loud speaker functioned from six in the morning until II at night.... We changed our room, remarking that this constant repetition of communist doctrine must either fix its phraseology subconsciously, or else develop a strong negative reaction."

Such a brutal hammering can hardly produce enthusiasm or spontaneous agreement. But it most probably creates a sense of helplessness in face of irresistible power. Not only will a phraseology be"subconsciously fixed," but there will also be fear of antagonizing the all-powerful propagandist, even in thought.

Kecskemeti, P. (1950). Totalitarian communications as a means of control: A note on the sociology of propaganda. The Public Opinion Quarterly, 14(2), p. 224-234.

[Kalyke]

16. Except that, for now, at least, we can get up and turn that shit off.

I've been known to do that where I get my oil change AND I complained to the manager, who told me that Faux was the only thing their management would allow them to play. So I asked for Herr Jiffy Lube Regional Manager's contact info - got a card and complained to him.

Next time I went in: whole new cable system with the TV on a learning channel (Animal Planet or Net Geo or some such). They also had choices for kids shows and news.

Complaining works!