What a waste of time and money this study was:
Sen. John Kerry has gotten the white-glove treatment from the press, garnering more praise from journalists than any other presidential candidate in the last quarter-century, according to a new analysis of almost 500 news stories released today by the Center for Media and Public Affairs.
“It’s not just that John Kerry has gotten better press than President Bush before this election, he’s gotten better press than anyone else since 1980. That’s significant,” said Bob Lichter, director of the D.C.-based nonpartisan research group.
“Kerry also got better press than anyone else in the days before the primaries as well,” Mr. Lichter added.
In October alone, Mr. Kerry had a “record-breaking 77 percent positive press evaluations,” compared with 34 percent positive for Mr. Bush, the study states.
Unprecedented, untrammeled accolades for Mr. Kerry were more than debate-related bounce, however. Since Labor Day, he also had a total of 58 percent positive stories, with just 36 percent for Mr. Bush.
The only upside to a Kerry victory is that once the press realizes what they have done- elect a marginal candidate who is, in the words of Howard Fineman, a ‘phenomenal phony’, they will turn on him with a viciousness that will be just disgusting. That leaves me with mixed feelings, because a failed Kerry Presidency does none of us any good, but it will be nice to see the Democrats getting what they deserve.
However, the behavior of the press has been shameful for the last four years. If Bush is re-elected, he will have done so despite fighting three wars- one against Al Qaeda and the Taliban, one against Saddam Hussein’s Ba’athist regime, and one against the media.
If you doubt the bias in the press regarding Kerry, just look at this quote from a Brokaw interview that has received NO ATTENTION:
Brokaw: Someone has analyzed the President’s military aptitude tests and yours, and concluded that he has a higher IQ than you do.
Kerry: That’s great. More power. I don’t know how they’ve done it, because my record is not public. So I don’t know where you’re getting that from.
But I thought you released all your military records, Sen. Kerry?
Russ
Too many in the press think exactly the way he professes to (or professed to, prior to the campaign season.)
The majority of the press will never turn on him… unless he betrays his alleged principles (which could happen, if he really is the complete poll-driven sack of nothing that he appears to be.)
Sandi
John, somehow MSNBC got it right (not that I agree with Kerry), but most of the news reports I have seen replaced the coma with a period and truncated the sentence in kerrys reply and reported his answer without the bit about his records:
Anyhow I can’t wait until it is over. Mark Steyn in a Chicago Sun-Times article summed up the end game pretty well with his last paragraph:
Simon Rippon
This sort of survey doesn’t prove anything, of course, because unbiased reporting does not demand equal numbers of positive and positive evaluations of both candidates. That would be stupidity, not impartiality. Bush has made such a monumental mess of presiding over the last four years (Iraq, jobs, Osama, ballooning deficit, health care) that it’s somewhat surprising that the stories about him aren’t *less* positive. (Republican media bias?) Presumably the unusually high positive evaluations of Kerry are a result of contrast with that record. It’s like being the average kid in a class full of dunces.
Sandi: How strange – Google news search doesn’t find any of the truncated quotes you report. Looks like a mythical element in the “mainstream liberal media bias” myth to me. Which “most of the news reports” *have* you seen?
Sandi
Simon the election is tomorrow, you can put down the talking points.
S.W. Anderson
“That leaves me with mixed feelings, because a failed Kerry Presidency does none of us any good, but it will be nice to see the Democrats getting what they deserve.”
You really are into vindictiveness and hatred, aren’t you?
The pity of it is that you have so many fellow travelers on the low road.
In a post below you’re undertandably angered by the Kerry supporters who behaved badly at an intersection. How, exactly, is what you’re doing here, posting sentiments like the one cited, any better?
My 2 cents: You and a lot of others on the right are really angry that you’ve come up against a basically moderate, intelligent AND sensible guy who’s run a long, hard campaign remarkably well, especially considering how much mud slinging and attack ads $200 million-plus bought for Bush.
Kerry’s not an elite snob, not a way-out radical liberal, not a gun-taker, not a wild spender, not a pollyanish pacifist, not a womanizer, gambler or alcoholic. He’s a good husband and father. He agrees marriage should be between a man and a woman, and he sees abortions of convenience as morally wrong.
Kerry is a veteran and a decorated war hero. Maybe worst of all, he’s thoughtful, pragmatic and reasonable, along with being exceptionally well informed.
All of which makes most of the slime thrown at him not stick, except in the minds of some of the most ignorant, gullible and/or simple-minded.
Those motivated by hate and vindictiveness are in a category all their own.
John Cole
SW- I didn’t read any of your sermon past this:
“You really are into vindictiveness and hatred, aren’t you?”
What I said was:
“That leaves me with mixed feelings, because a failed Kerry Presidency does none of us any good, but it will be nice to see the Democrats getting what they deserve.”
In no way shape or form do I want a Kerry Presidency to be a failure- but that is what I am predicting. Thus, while that would be miserable for the country, it would be nice to heap a little payback on the Democrats like Atrios, the Daily Kos, and the mainstream media who have ACTIVELY WORKED to portray everything this administration has done as a failure.
OR am I supposed to turn the other cheek? Mind you, I never said I was going to make the Kerry Presidency a failure- he is goingto do that on his own. Contrast that attitude to the behavior of the MEdia Matters/Michael MOOre/DU/Upper East Side/Berkely/Nancy PElosi crowd.
Then sit your pompous ass down and think about who deserves a lecture. Me, or them?
HH
So recently we find out Kerry admitting after saying time and again his record was out, that it’s not out, and oh by the way, accusations today by credible people saying his discharge was not honorable… and of course Kerry still won’t release his record. Is this any way to elect a president?
Hal
Wow John. If you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen. I don’t think I’ve ever seen a bunch of whining wimps in my entire life. Yee gods.
Kimmitt
Your own post argues against you. If Kerry’s favorable treatment predates the general election, then the obvious conclusion to draw is that Kerry is good at eliciting positive media, not that there is some conspiracy to elect a Democrat.
Believe me, as a former Deaniac, the phenomenon you cite was incredibly frustrating during the primaries. But it really does represent nothing other than Kerry’s strengths.
Also, if and when Kerry turns out to be a decent President, will you please turn down the stridency? The world isn’t going to end because we fired a guy with the worst jobs record since Hoover and the worst deficit record since Bush 41 combined.
Patrick
Kimmitt,
1. What, exactly, are “Kerry’s strengths”?
2. If and when Kerry turns out to be a decent President, I’ll laugh and kiss the ground. More likely, it seems, that he’ll take the progress that has been made in Iraq and turn it into a Bay of Pigs-like escapade (by premature disengagement). More likely, it seems, that UBL and AQ and will once again see the repudiation of strong leadership as proof of their ability to influence the electorate of free countries. More likely, it seems, that an attack on Chicago or LA or Seattle will be dealt with in the strongest possible law enforcement terms.
I pray all this is for naught and GWB is re-elected.
Oh, and the jobs thing, perhaps you’ve heard of a little incident in September of 2001?
No matter how hard you try, you can’t go back to September 10th again for a do-over.
CountFloyd
Kerry’s not an elite snob, not a way-out radical liberal, not a gun-taker, not a wild spender, not a pollyanish pacifist, not a womanizer, gambler or alcoholic.
He sure acts the part of a gigilo though, don’t he?
CountFloyd
Kerry has no strengths, no “plans” – the guy’s an empty suit and alot of hair. No record to run on. He just says he’d be a better prez than Bush. That’s about it. What legislation did Forbes Kerry pass? National Population Awareness Week? Puh-leeze. People are fooling themselves when they say they’re voting for Kerry. These small minded people are voting against
CountFloyd
oops forgot to close a tag.
Kerry has no strengths, no “plans” – the guy’s an empty suit and alot of hair. No record to run on. He just says he’d be a better prez than Bush. That’s about it. What legislation did Forbes Kerry pass? National Population Awareness Week? Puh-leeze. People are fooling themselves when they say they’re voting for Kerry. These small minded people are voting against Bush out of blind, drooling, irrational hatred.
Lunch
Was Sinclair Broadcasting included in that study?
For those to whom strong leadership is the prevailing virtue; what does it say about a leader that fully half of those to be led wouldn’t trust him enough to follow him to Fort Knox to pick up a promised ingot?
wild bird
Thats nothing i have heard that after many years they find out that gun do protect lives and that the same bunch of goverment buricrats spent $50:000 to find out that sheep dog do protect sheep well duh any good sheapard knows that and why else in the old mwarner brothers cartoons is that sheep dog womping the wolf all the time
Kimmitt
Oh, and the jobs thing, perhaps you’ve heard of a little incident in September of 2001?
Aren’t you tired of having a President you always have to make excuses for?