Well, not in so many words but that's the implication :-) of the Ombudson admitting that they had way too much positive coverage of Obama and didn't ask him the tough questions:
The Post provided a lot of good campaign coverage, but readers have been consistently critical of the lack of probing issues coverage and what they saw as a tilt toward Democrat Barack Obama. My surveys, which ended on Election Day, show that they are right on both counts.What's bad for the MSM is that we all know that they wanted Obama to win and did everything they could to make it happen. They got the candidate they wanted and when he blows it (yeah, I'm that sure -- not if, when) they'll take the heat for their decision to throw journalistic ethics aside to support their candidate. It's one thing for the voters to ignore the issues and Obama's background but it's another for the MSM to do it. The public can form an emotional attachment to a candidate, ignoring all the negatives and only focusing on the positive but it's another for the MSM to do it too. They have an obligation to the public to do their job and this election cycle they refused.My assistant, Jean Hwang, and I have been examining Post coverage since Nov. 11 last year on issues, voters, fundraising, the candidates' backgrounds and horse-race stories on tactics, strategy and consultants. We also have looked at photos and Page 1 stories since Obama captured the nomination June 4. Numbers don't tell you everything, but they give you a sense of The Post's priorities.
The count was lopsided, with 1,295 horse-race stories and 594 issues stories. The Post was deficient in stories that reported more than the two candidates trading jabs; readers needed articles, going back to the primaries, comparing their positions with outside experts' views. There were no broad stories on energy or science policy, and there were few on religion issues.
[...]
But Obama deserved tougher scrutiny than he got, especially of his undergraduate years, his start in Chicago and his relationship with Antoin "Tony" Rezko, who was convicted this year of influence-peddling in Chicago. The Post did nothing on Obama's acknowledged drug use as a teenager.
I think this sums up this election:
(via)
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Add to Facebook
Add to StumbleUpon
Subscribe
Guy, they are all still "image bearers" and deserve to be treated the way we would like to be treated.
Other publications (notably The New Yorker) gave strong coverage of Obama's early time in Chicago, including his community organizing and Tony Rezko.
What do Obama's youthful mistakes (as long as he hasn't repeated them, of course) or even his undergraduate studies (as long as he didn't flunk out/transfer five times like Sarah Palin) have to do with his fitness for office?
The fawning coverage in my local paper today was nauseating.
"On page 12, a commemorative poster celebrating the victory of Senator Barack Obama, the first African American elected to the Presidency"
You see, not "the first advocate of free choice", or "the first candidate with a progressive agenda", or "the first advocate of financial regulation".
NOOOOOOOO. He's "the first black guy". His skin color is ALL that matters to anybody. He won because he's black, and only because he's black. And that's racism, pure and simple.
MzEllen
November 9, 2008 5:20 PM
Guy, they are all still "image bearers" and deserve to be treated the way we would like to be treated.
___________________________________________________
Well you have taken it upon yourself to lecture me and tell me how to speak. Please take note that I am quite aware of your opinion at this point and if I don't cooperate with your demands you'll simply have to adjust in whatever way makes it possible for you to cope with the reality that I will comment as I determine and you will determine how you will comment. Got that? Good.
Next Please!
Guy, it is up to you, of course. You remind me of the way the liberals speak.
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.