Monday, March 14, 2005

"Well...DUH!" News of the Day.

Study Shows U.S. Election Coverage Harder on Bush. Really?

U.S. media coverage of last year's election was three times more likely to be negative toward President Bush than Democratic challenger John Kerry, according to a study released Monday.

The annual report by a press watchdog that is affiliated with Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism said that 36 percent of stories about Bush were negative compared to 12 percent about Kerry, a Massachusetts senator.

Only 20 percent were positive toward Bush compared to 30 percent of stories about Kerry that were positive, according to the report by the Project for Excellence in Journalism.

When I had decided I could no longer support the Stupid Party, I still noticed the raw deal they were getting in the press. It was the same in 1992 when I'd given up on Bush 41 and still became aware of the massive press bias in favor of Clinton. When you feel sorry for the guys you aren't even going to vote for, that's a good sign that a unfair shafting is taking place.

Sure, it's old news, but when the Washington Post managing editor Philip Bennett is giving interviews to China's People's Daily that "I don't think US should be the leader of the world", it's good to keep in mind that while the MSM keeps lying to us about their biases and hysterically trying to convince us that Team Dubya is censoring them blah-blah-woof-woof, their anti-American hatred is simmering beneath the surface.

I wonder how that Chinese reporter would do if he attempted to speak out against the Chinese dictatorship in the way Bennett slashes at his government? Doesn't the fact that Bennett doesn't really have to worry about ending up in a prison labor camp put the lie to the MSM's FUD campaign.


No comments: