Michigan win led to a decisive shift in media coverage
"Obama did not enjoy a single week of coverage that was more positive than
negative. "Hahaha. That is funny stuff! All I hear from
conservative pundits is how much President Obama has the media in his pocket.
You would think that for somebody with the media in his corner the guy
could get at least one week of positive coverage.
Well, Mark, he has to live with his record so that's the problem for Mr.
Obama.This thing with the secret service is expanding, too.
I'm sure he wishes it would just go away.
And if he didn't... Deseret News would not write an article about it.
WHO ARE THE "NEWSMAKERS"?"Only 7 percent of stories
featured the Texas congressman [Ron Paul] as a significant newsmaker, compared
with 59 percent for Romney, 31 percent for Santorum and 30 percent for
Gingrich.""Newsmaker" is an interesting term. The print
media is very good at reporting news by newsmakers. And when it comes to
television news, the local news media seem to do a very good job of reporting
news by newsmakers.But for some reason, the national television
outlets seem to fill their time slots with conversations between and among
reporters and pundits, talking to each other.Have you ever noticed?
Look for it. An anchor person interviews another person who is employed by the
same news organization. One talk show host or news anchorperson asks questions
of another pundit or commentator.The "newsmakers" who are in
office or running for office or heads of agencies appointed to office or being
kicked out of office are not interviewed as much as may be needed to get to the
real news by those who should be considered the newsmakers.Like I
say, however, the print media seems to do a better job of covering the
To toosmartforyou | 12:26 a.m. 4/23Obama's record: cleaning up
the mess left to him by GWBush, economic indicators improving, unemployment
decreasing, 24 months of increasing employment, manufacturing returning to the
United States -- yes it took expenditures to bring about the improvements, but
they are now starting to bear fruit -- and don't forget removal/death of
terrorist leaders. And all that despite the efforts of the Republicans and
those on the far right to make him fail. Just think what he could have
accomplished if he had had some help from the Republicans and far-righters
instead of constant obstruction.As to the secret service
"thing" -- why is that President Obama's fault? Are you saying
that he issued instructions that his protective detail could act like pigs on
their personal time off? Are you saying that your employer should be
responsible if your co-workers went out and caroused? Somehow I don't
think so. Put the blame for the secret service incident where it
belongs -- on the secret service agents who acted improperly. They are quickly
being made to pay the price for their actions. That is the appropriate way to
Now, can we do a similar analysis over the next couple of weeks, and find out
who is going to be the president next year? And maybe then we can even skip the
part where we ask voters in November what they think.
furry, it's convenient that you still, after 3 years are blaming Bush, then
you leave off the fact that the dems controlled the house and the senate for
years before Bush left.You criticize the Reps. for not helping Obama, yet
they had control of everything up until late last year.But, if you're
going to give Obama credit for getting Osama, as if he practically did it with
his own bare hands, then you also get to give Obama credit for destroying the
credit rating of our country. You see, that happened under Obama's watch,
so you can't cherry pick the few (very few) bright spots and blame the rest
on someone else. And tell me you wouldn't be bashing Bush if this secret
service thing happened under his watch. Hardly.By the way, how's
that bright shiny budget President Obama came up with being received by his own
party?Not much of an economy wiz is he? Big surprise.But he can
organize a community like nobody's business!
To furrySighhh, how long can you people continue blaming GB for
everything? He's a real gentleman to not lash back at the nonsense and
stupidity that accompanies liberal politics. He was way more of a president
than Obamaniaca will ever be......hopefully for only another 9 months if we can
Interesting, because most of the media I watched or read said this was going to
drag out to June at least or to the convention. A lot of stuff about how Romney
couldn't seal the deal, had significant opposition, couldn't rally the
conservative/evangelical/tea part vote etc. Maybe I was watching
and reading other media than these guys...
Looks like the media speaks and the people follow.Gone are the days
of substantial research on candidate ideology, as well as the ideology
itself.Romney's a good guy, right? No need to look at his
record, right? No second guesses as to whether you would vote for his exact
record if he wasn't Mormon, right?Do your research. Think about
the issues. Don't simply assume.