Salon’s Joan Walsh joins the growing list of those in the media (including fellow liberals like Bill Press) noting that reporters from the establishment media swoon over Barack Obama and hate Hillary Clinton:
I was struck when I got to Iowa and New Hampshire in January by how our media colleagues were just swooning over Barack Obama. That is not too strong a word. They were swooning. I was at a speech, I remember it, I will write about it some day, in Manchester, and every, the biggest names in our business were there, and they were, they could repeat some of his speech lines to one another. It was like a Bruce Springsteen concert where the fans sing along. And, you know, I respected it to some extent. He’s a towering political figure. Of our generation, he’s probably the best politician, he’s inspiring. And, reporters, white reporters, black reporters, reporters of every race, we want to get beyond racism in America. So, he was, he was inspiring, I understood it, they’re humans, they responded. The downside though is that they hate, hate Hillary Clinton, most of them. Hate is not too strong a word.
Though Walsh is referring specifically to the early days of the campaign, this phenomenon was noted again in March in the New York Times and recently by John F. Harris and Jim VandeHei at the Politico. And this dynamic does seem to have affected the overall coverage of the campaign. For other specific examples, one might compare what NYT Public Editor Hoyt Clark wrote about the paper’s high-profile, baseless innuendo regarding John McCain as compared to the paper’s recent listless and opaque coverage of Obama’s relationship with the Rev. Jeremiah Wright (for which which Tom Maguire has apt commentary), or Elizabeth Wurtzel’s suggestion that the media knows they are reporting about Barack Obama’s relationship with unrepentant domestic terrorist William Ayers.
I agree with Walsh that the media’s reactions to Obama and Clinton are not irrational. Obama is a fresh face, who appears on the surface to be an inspiring and genial figure (so long as you don’t ask him any uncomfortable questions, especially in mid-waffle). In contrast, Clinton does not appear to be a figure of any great warmth who has had testy relations with the press in her past.ÂÂ
But it should be noted that with the exeption of Clinton’s vote on the Iraq invasion, the issue differences between Clinton or Obama are not large (and when John F. Kerry was the Democratic nominee in 2004, Obama was a lot more forgiving of such votes). Thus, the media’s reaction to Obama over Clinton is personal or springing from the same demand for hopeyness and changitude seen in the public at large. Either way, it should hardly be surprising that the media’s scrutiny of Obama and Clinton is based more on personal issues and the question of squaring Obama’s unifying rhetoric with his far-Left coterie than it does issues of public policy.
(h/t Memeorandum.)
Comment by happyfeet on 5/4 @ 1:04 pm #
If the media hates Hillary as much as Walsh says imagine how they feel about Republicans.
Comment by Darleen on 5/4 @ 1:40 pm #
imagine how they feel about Republicans.
No imagination necessary.
shorter Rich: Republicans are Racist. Go Obama.
Comment by geoffb on 5/4 @ 2:15 pm #
“But it should be noted that with the exeption of Clinton’s vote on the Iraq invasion, the issue differences between Clinton or Obama are not large”
For the left it is all about “ends”. What they are selecting is what will be the best “means” to get there. The ideas, issues, policies, statements, debates are only masks to hide behind. The “ends” are all that matters. This fight is over how to best get there and who will rule then.
Comment by B Moe on 5/4 @ 2:18 pm #
He’s a towering political figure. Of our generation, he’s probably the best politician, he’s inspiring.
He is a gifted spokesmodel. He is a charismatic salesman. He has done absolutely nothing to be considered a brilliant politician, or given any particularly memorable speeches. To say otherwise is a reflection of the vapidity of the media, nothing else.
Comment by SteveMG on 5/4 @ 3:09 pm #
You mean to say that reporters are human beings and that their personal views affect their reporting?
No. I thought that vaunted editorial process eliminated such things.
So, all those polls that show 80%+ of reporters always voting Democrat and the majority as liberals are indeed worthy of attention?
Comment by LiveFromFortLivingRoom on 5/4 @ 3:17 pm #
If he was a white republican saying the same things would the media still love him?
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 5/4 @ 3:26 pm #
althouse and dr. reynolds buy the visual cortex argument
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 5/4 @ 3:27 pm #
so does the media.
;)
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 5/4 @ 3:36 pm #
btw
resilience
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 5/4 @ 3:37 pm #
argument to the visual cortex + resilience
Comment by nishizonoshinji on 5/4 @ 3:39 pm #
sry, duplicate link.
Karl don’t you approve of Obama’s gastax holiday position?
Comment by Slartibartfast on 5/4 @ 3:42 pm #
Somebody please clue me in to what nishi is talking about.
Comment by B Moe on 5/4 @ 3:51 pm #
She apparently thinks Obama is the first candidate to use visual marketing techniques, and this is a sign of his genius. That is what I was referring to in #4, nish. It isn’t anything new.
Comment by MayBee on 5/4 @ 3:51 pm #
Slarti- nishi is advancing the ground-breaking theory that some people vote based on what is visually pleasing. I know that isn’t true, because of the way Richard Nixon cruised to victory after the televised Kennedy debates.
Comment by Slartibartfast on 5/4 @ 4:02 pm #
*facepalm*
Comment by Slartibartfast on 5/4 @ 4:25 pm #
*facepalm*, the poster.
Comment by Terry Gain on 5/4 @ 4:28 pm #
Informed people might fairly argue whether America is on the 40 yard line or the 20 yard line in Iraq -or somwhere in between – but no one can seriously argue that the progress in the last 16 months has not been phenomenal.
Despite this progress Obama wants to punt. He wants to let al Qaeda up off the mat so he can go fight them in Afstan (he says). He is too uninformed to realize that they aren’t in Afstan in significant numbers, but they soon will be if they realize the recruiting boon that victory in Iraq will hand them.
On the most important question facing America Obama is clueless and his supporters are dreaming if they think disengagement will provide anything other than temporary respite.
Obama: he is the man Iran, al Qaeda, Hamas and Hezbelloah have been waitng for.
Comment by Mikey NTH on 5/4 @ 4:39 pm #
Believe…
Say it’s only a paper moon,
Sailing over a cardboard sea.
But it wouldn’t be make-believe
If you believed in me.
Yes, it’s only a canvas sky,
Hanging over a muslin tree.
But it wouldn’t be make-believe
If you believed in me.
Believe…
Comment by N. O'Brain on 5/4 @ 5:27 pm #
“shorter Rich: Republicans are Racist. Go Obama.”
The irony is that the Democrat Party has been the party of the four S’s: slavery, secession, segregation and socialism
I will never understand why blacks allow the Democrats to treat them like political lawn jockeys.
Comment by N. O'Brain on 5/4 @ 5:29 pm #
Why does she expect anyone to take an illiterate seriously?
Comment by guinsPen on 5/4 @ 5:29 pm #
BM & MB,
Are you sure? Here’s my translation.
Could be that my machine’s thrown a wheel, though.
Comment by Terry Gain on 5/4 @ 5:46 pm #
“The irony is that the Democrat Party has been the party of the four S’s: slavery, secession, segregation and socialism.”
You forgot surrender.
Comment by Spies, Brigands, and Pirates on 5/4 @ 6:08 pm #
You forgot surrender.
Also sodomites, slackers, sluts, sexual predators, and snobs.
Comment by Jeffersonian on 5/4 @ 6:34 pm #
And Stalinists.
Comment by geoffb on 5/4 @ 8:06 pm #
The Democratic Party, proudly supporting Tyrants, Slavers, Dictators and Murderous Thugs for over 150 years. Your one stop shop. Thugs ‘R’ Us.
Comment by TmjUtah on 5/4 @ 11:02 pm #
“ And, you know, I respected it to some extent. He’s a towering political figure. Of our generation, he’s probably the best politician, he’s inspiring.”
I would like to sell this lady a car.
Or a parcel of land.
Maybe insurance.
Wow. Just wow. She travels in small ponds. I doubt she’s ever even seen a real frog, know what I mean?
… towering….
Mothers, don’t let your kids grow up to be journalists. Unfreakin’ believable.
Comment by ironpacker on 5/5 @ 2:43 am #
They say those that can’t do teach,and those that can’t teach coach. I guess that if you can’t do, teach, or coach you become a journalist.
Comment by Enoch_Root - twp on 5/5 @ 5:38 am #
But it should be noted that with the exeption of Clinton’s vote on the Iraq invasion, the issue differences between Clinton or Obama are not large (and when John F. Kerry was the Democratic nominee in 2004, Obama was a lot more forgiving of such votes).
Karl – this is an excellent point… but I think it speaks to something more insidious, as I have mentioned previously: if we delve into the numbers of support for Obama among Blacks (roughly 90%), can we conclude racism, sexism, or both? And when will I see that story in print?
Pingback by The MSM vs. Mayberry [Karl] on 5/5 @ 11:11 am #
[...] magazine’s Kurt Anderson — a self-described Obamaphile –becomes the latest in a string of media figures to admit that establishment media journalists generally back Barack Obama over [...]
Pingback by The proggosphere tries to mau-mau the MSM into even more pro-Obama coverage [Karl] on 7/10 @ 8:41 am #
[...] problem with this claim is that — as noted here again and again and again and again (and then some) — Barack Obama has consistently enjoyed a greater volume of [...]