Pat Caddell: Let’s face it, media bias has reached a new level of corruption

posted at 8:41 pm on October 1, 2012 by Allahpundit

A rejoinder to today’s David Carr piece wondering why righties worry about the near-entirety of “nonpartisan” media covering for Obama’s failures when we have Rush Limbaugh and Fox News on our side. Real simple: Because millions of voters, especially those in the middle who tend to decide elections, don’t have the time or interest in politics to seek out overtly partisan news sources. They take what’s fed to them by major news brands (network news, top papers), virtually all of which profess objectivity. For all the grumbling we do here about MSNBC, a two-minute segment on the NBC Nightly News that pays more attention to Romney’s “gaffes” than to security failures at the Benghazi consulate probably does more damage to Republican chances — not to mention American national security — than an hour of Chris Matthews ranting about whatever. And for all our complaints about how a particular story is unfairly harsh to Romney, by far the more damaging bias, I think, is when the coverage is unduly disinterested in serious errors made by Obama. Walter Russell Mead makes the point with an especially glaring example:

If George W. Bush were president now, and had ordered the surge and was responsible for the strategic decisions taken and not taken in Afghanistan over the last four years, the mainstream press would be rubbing our noses in his miserable failures and inexcusable blunders 24/7. The New York Times and the Washington Post would be treating us to pictures of every fallen soldier. The PBS Newshour would feature nightly post-mortems on “America’s failed strategies in the Afghan War” and every arm-chair strategist in America would be filling the op-ed pages with the brilliant 20/20 hindsight ideas that our pathetic, clueless, failed president was too dumb and too cocky to have had.

There would be no end to the woes and the recriminations. There would be the most moving and eloquent examples of hand wringing in the New York Review of Books, elegantly demonstrating that the cretinous assumptions and moral failings that led Bush into his failed Afghan policy weren’t his alone, but reflected broader, deeper failings in America itself. One is almost sorry for the sake of the authors of these diatribes that Bush is gone; the failure of our Afghan strategy is so sweeping, so unavoidable, that it would be the best possible backdrop against which to paint a stirring portrait of a failed president misleading a flawed people. What works of polemical literature have been lost, what inspired jeremiads will never be penned, what scalding portraits of America’s inherent flaws will never see the light of day because W left the White House too soon.

He’s indicting the press twice there: Once for not being hard enough on O in matters of war and again for being overly hard on W, but both failings are explained by the same impulse. Same goes for Caddell’s point in the clip about Obama merrily jetting off to Vegas for a fundraiser the day after Chris Stevens was murdered in Benghazi. Under a Republican president, that’s worth three days of bloody-shirt waving in the press; under Obama, it’s five minutes of chin-pulling.

I think Joel Pollak is onto something in arguing that the media’s taken to treating Romney as the de facto incumbent, although I can’t decide if that’s something they’re doing consciously or by instinct. My hunch is that, for some of them, it’s less a deliberate strategy to put Romney on the defensive than it is a habit they’re falling into because they’re itching to return to adversarial/watchdog duty. Their partisan leanings have made that too difficult for four years, but now they’ve got a person on the other side who’s close to winning the presidency to whom they can speak “truth.” So President Romney’s statement the morning after the embassy attack is a Very Big Deal with Very Serious Implications for the race, but Obama blowing town to raise some money in Vegas later that night is “curious” or whatever. Rest assured, if Romney wins, Afghanistan will once again be a matter of pressing national interest subject to “grim milestone” watches on the news rather than the very minor foreign-policy subplot that it’s become. In fact, I doubt most members of the media would deny that. One thing I’ve noticed as media watchdogging has exploded online is that they’re much more open about admitting which way the press, as a whole, leans. There are too many examples of it to deny it, so why bother denying it? They’ll cop to it in the aggregate, so long as their own personal integrity isn’t questioned. Now if only they’d do something about it.



Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

If anybody else has other suggestions, please share them with us!

wren on October 1, 2012 at 9:45 PM

Excellent list. I`d like to add: Don`t feed the beast. Don`t spend your money on dishonest sources, buy their products or allow them to thrive. Take your money and go to the honest ones or keep it in your pocket.

For instance HBO. Why people still given their hard earned cash to HBO I`ll never understand.

kim roy on October 1, 2012 at 9:48 PM

can you imagine if a Obama was president during 9/11?

urban elitist on October 1, 2012 at 9:13 PM

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha….

ccrosby on October 1, 2012 at 9:30 PM

The FBI would still be waiting for permission to interview Mohamed Atta’s parents in Egypt.

slickwillie2001 on October 1, 2012 at 9:48 PM

can you imagine if a Obama was president during 9/11?

urban elitist on October 1, 2012 at 9:13 PM

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha….

ccrosby on October 1, 2012 at 9:30 PM

No offense, but that nightmarish thought is anything but amusing.

And if people don’t properly assess the dangers facing our great nation, we very may see a similar scenario ensue.

My guess is that ‘president’ Barack Hussein Downgrade would impose Sharia law on the nation to appease the terrorists.

Chip on October 1, 2012 at 9:48 PM

Third, Bush golfed and blathered his way though multiple disasters for the first six years of his presidency — can you imagine if a Obama was president during 9/11?

urbane effetist on October 1, 2012 at 9:13 PM

George Bush only played golf 24 times in his 2 terms as President.

King Obama is well past 100 times in less than 4 years.

JPeterman on October 1, 2012 at 9:49 PM

For those following, How to take on the Obama Enemy media: http://paratisiusa.blogspot.com/2012/09/an-open-letter-to-those-who-should-know.html?spref=tw

God Bless America!

paratisi on October 1, 2012 at 9:35 PM

Nice.

the_nile on October 1, 2012 at 9:49 PM

The one with the bloody cankles is guilty.

Obama must fess up and admit he has no dink.

SparkPlug on October 1, 2012 at 9:49 PM

Irban elitist is the guy staring at the faded Obama poster in his childhood bedroom right now. I get great pleasure that history will end up judging George W. Bush very well while a flash in the pan politician like Obama will remembered as a poser that shirked responsibilty at every turn when America needed leadership.

Ellis on October 1, 2012 at 9:50 PM

I get great pleasure that history will end up judging George W. Bush very well while a flash in the pan politician like Obama will remembered as a poser that shirked responsibilty at every turn when America needed leadership.

Ellis on October 1, 2012 at 9:50 PM

I profoundly doubt that history will judge Obama anywhere near that kindly.

SWalker on October 1, 2012 at 9:52 PM

Pat Caddell: Let’s face it, media bias has reached a new level of corruption

No, Pat…it’s still the old (high) level of corruption. It’s just that you and a few others are at least now willing to admit that there is a problem. But you’ll only go so far I know.

Dr. ZhivBlago on October 1, 2012 at 9:53 PM

Memo to Romney: This debate (purposely said) are going to be your VERY BEST shot to go to the American public directly without a MSM filter or bias (even though the questions could be biased).

If you don’t make a good connection in this FIRST debate, you might as well give it up. A majority of the enamored lemmings, called the American electorate, is ready to give Obama a second term. Just saying!

Rndguy on October 1, 2012 at 9:55 PM

The one with the bloody cankles is guilty.

Obama must fess up and admit he has no dink.

SparkPlug on October 1, 2012 at 9:49 PM

The media makes sure the cankles are clean.
How is her BFF Huma? Hmmm.. Wieners, Islamics, and cankles..oh my. Thr trifecta of media love.

bazil9 on October 1, 2012 at 9:58 PM

I profoundly doubt that history will judge Obama anywhere near that kindly.

SWalker on October 1, 2012 at 9:52 PM

Oh, walker..disagree. The 1st black prez will go down in history as the awesome. They will see to it.
I will see it in 20 year when my nephew shows me hi school books- I have no doubt.

bazil9 on October 1, 2012 at 10:01 PM

urban elitist on October 1, 2012 at 8:47 PM

If Caddell had said that Republicans all suck and the MSM is just fine with what it’s doing, you’d be praising him as an honest, solid human being. Wouldn’t you, sh!tbird?

Moose Drool on October 1, 2012 at 10:02 PM

In the Taxachusetts Debate did the DNC cut a check to their pretentious media shill David Gregory up front or did they wait until afterward?

viking01 on October 1, 2012 at 10:02 PM

bazil9 on October 1, 2012 at 9:58 PM

The LMS are the cankle cleaners and we must stop them from cleaning Hillary’s cankles.

Scrumpy and Grace will help us stop the cankle cleaners.

SparkPlug on October 1, 2012 at 10:02 PM

can you imagine if a Obama was president during 9/11?

urban elitist on October 1, 2012 at 9:13 PM

New York would look like the Benghazi consulate…and Obama would stay cower pray to the East in Vegas.

viking01 on October 1, 2012 at 10:06 PM

Thank God for Pat Caddell and Doug Schoen.

OxyCon on October 1, 2012 at 10:06 PM

Real simple: Because millions of voters, especially those in the middle who tend to decide elections, don’t have the time or interest in politics to seek out overtly partisan news sources. They take what’s fed to them by major news brands (network news, top papers), virtually all of which profess objectivity.

Nice thing, for once.

My mom was telling me about seeing the “Mitt Romney caught on tape” segment on ABC news — the report on the 47% comment.

She told me about seeing it and said that she couldn’t understand what the big deal was, and that he was right anyway. All that’s great, but the part I wanted to mention is this:

She also told me Sawyer was using that serious voice I “always talk about,” that oh so serious, oh my God voice Sawyer whips out to let people know what to think. I enjoyed hearing mom mention that more than her agreement, because I never realized she even paid attention to me when I mentioned Sawyer’s theatrics. But she did. And she saw through it.

Keep rattling your traps, people. :) It makes a difference.

Axe on October 1, 2012 at 10:07 PM

In my opinion our side underestimates the power of our conservative media (talk radio, internet, sometimes (not all the times) Foxnews…). The conventional wisdom is that the independents or undecided get most of their news from the liberal media but I tend to the disagree… I think a majority of them get their news from both sides…

mnjg on October 1, 2012 at 10:08 PM

SWalker on October 1, 2012 at 9:52 PM

Oh, walker..disagree. The 1st black prez will go down in history as the awesome. They will see to it.
I will see it in 20 year when my nephew shows me hi school books- I have no doubt.

bazil9 on October 1, 2012 at 10:01 PM

Nope, “The evil that men do lives after them; the good is oft interred with their bones” Obama’s evil will not only live on long after him, but it will mock him forever.

SWalker on October 1, 2012 at 10:08 PM

can you imagine if a Obama was president during 9/11?

urban elitist on October 1, 2012 at 9:13 PM

Yeah, I can. He would have apologized to AQ for having the WTC towers built in the flight path of the planes that hit them, causing the needless death of the Muslim hijackers onboard. Then he would have offered reparations to the families of those same Muslims.

Moose Drool on October 1, 2012 at 10:08 PM

It’s criminal – what the media have allowed this Obama regime to get away with. Our current media doesn’t deserve to have Freedom of the Press enshrined in the First Amendment.

TarheelBen on October 1, 2012 at 10:09 PM

I`d like to add: Don`t feed the beast. Don`t spend your money on dishonest sources, buy their products or allow them to thrive. Take your money and go to the honest ones or keep it in your pocket.

For instance HBO. Why people still given their hard earned cash to HBO I`ll never understand.

kim roy on October 1, 2012 at 9:48 PM

Great addition to the list, kim roy!

I follow a modified version of your suggestion. I agree that I don’t spend money on liberal beasts.

But I do like to be informed so I am prepared to counter the ideas that Hollywood and others put into liberal heads (or support positive movies whenever I see them). So I go to FREE movie screenings for important movies whenever possible.

You can find out about free movie screenings in your area at websites like:

GOFOBO.com
FilmMetro.com
Fatwallet.com (Freebie Forum Movie screenings thread)
Various radio station & local newspaper websites

HBO in particular, often promotes free screenings of its big movies via Entertainment Weekly’s website/email list

And once you go to a couple of these screenings in your area, you will find other sources of screening passes in your specific local area by chatting with people while you wait for the screening together.

Have fun!

wren on October 1, 2012 at 10:16 PM

can you imagine if a Obama was president during 9/11?

urban elitist on October 1, 2012 at 9:13 PM

We already know what his spiritual mentor, Jeremiah Wright, said about it: “Americans chickens . . . have come home to roost.”

TarheelBen on October 1, 2012 at 10:17 PM

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha….

ccrosby on October 1, 2012 at 9:30 PM

No offense, but that nightmarish thought is anything but amusing.

And if people don’t properly assess the dangers facing our great nation, we very may see a similar scenario ensue.

My guess is that ‘president’ Barack Hussein Downgrade would impose Sharia law on the nation to appease the terrorists.

Chip on October 1, 2012 at 9:48 PM

It wasn’t meant as humor, it is complete terror at the thought!

Some of us react in strange ways I guess…

ccrosby on October 1, 2012 at 10:20 PM

“They’ll cop to it in the aggregate, so long as their own personal integrity isn’t questioned…”

Well that is the rub, isn’t it…?

… All of the enablers should be shunned, called out, booed, and made accountable for their behavior every moment they pull their pointy heads out of Obowma’s a%%!

I would love to see the crowd turn on the media at a Team Romney event, shouting:


“What about your gaaaaaffs! What about your gaaaaaffs!

Seven Percent Solution on October 1, 2012 at 10:21 PM

Caddell? … Honest?

No one’s ever accused him of that.

turdbin elitist on October 1, 2012 at 8:58 PM

Very well, then I’ll do what “no one” has ever done. Pat Caddell is honest. He is HONEST! This is virtually unheard of in today’s Democrat party.

Benedict Nelson on October 1, 2012 at 10:22 PM

Ok Ok! I give up what’s wrong with media bias.

It seems to me that as long as I have the freedom to select the sources of information then media bias is a good thing, it give me the opportunity to see the other side of the flame and decide for my self what maybe the truth.

It is not the media that has created the “get a way with it” mentality but it is those among us that have chosen to not exercise our Constitutional give rights of freedom to choose.

jpcpt03 on October 1, 2012 at 10:35 PM

Under a Republican president, that’s worth three days of bloody-shirt waving in the press; under Obama, it’s five minutes of chin-pulling.

summed up pretty well…

cmsinaz on October 1, 2012 at 10:48 PM

Ok Ok! I give up what’s wrong with media bias.

It seems to me that as long as I have the freedom to select the sources of information then media bias is a good thing,

jpcpt03 on October 1, 2012 at 10:35 PM

Many, many millions of voters don’t pay that much attention, and might pick up a soundbite from the NBC Nightly News once or twice a week. Obama’s entire campaign is aimed at low-information voters, and believe me, there’s plenty of them out there.

TarheelBen on October 1, 2012 at 10:52 PM

I saw Caddell’s AIM speech. A-OK. Especially about Romney’s feckless campaign which he calls THE WORST IN US PRESIDENTIAL HISTORY and I totally agree.

MaiDee on October 1, 2012 at 10:52 PM

Many, many millions of voters don’t pay that much attention, and might pick up a soundbite from the NBC Nightly News once or twice a week. Obama’s entire campaign is aimed at low-information voters, and believe me, there’s plenty of them out there.

TarheelBen on October 1, 2012 at 10:52 PM

THIS

cmsinaz on October 1, 2012 at 10:53 PM

Caddell is like every other talking head — he says what he’s paid to say.

urban elitist on October 1, 2012 at 9:07 PM

What are you basing that silly claim on?
Your personal delusion does not count as evidence.

Mimzey on October 1, 2012 at 10:53 PM

Synonyms:

“Urban Elitist”

Urban = “central”

Elitist = “pompous ass”

Fits!

LaRepublican on October 1, 2012 at 11:23 PM

Caddell has been a washed up hack since the early 80s. Hard living and bad polling wrecked his career. Unable to earn a living through his profession, he peddles his a** as the political equivalent of Stepn Fetchit, sucking up to his GOP masters and betraying what few ideals he might once have had for a few dimes. Sad, really.

urban elitist on October 1, 2012 at 8:47 PM

Even if true, how does that make what he said false?

Baerwulf on October 1, 2012 at 11:24 PM

Many, many millions of voters don’t pay that much attention, and might pick up a soundbite from the NBC Nightly News once or twice a week. Obama’s entire campaign is aimed at low-information voters, and believe me, there’s plenty of them out there.

TarheelBen on October 1, 2012 at 10:52 PM

Don’t forget the general Leftist ideologies they’re hit with subliminally through Hollywood and the music industry…then there’s Letterman, Leno and the other late night hacks, and of course the stuff they present on Stewart’s, Maher’s, Oprah’s and Colbert’s shows…The View…and lessee, Facebook, emails, alphabet network “news” spots on the radio, local news, local papers, magazines and of course good ol’ fashion peer-pressure from friends, co-workers and family members.

I believe the Commies call it “nudging”? It’s a long, drawn-out propaganda/brainwashing campaign that goes back may 80 years.

Dr. ZhivBlago on October 1, 2012 at 11:33 PM

This issue needs to be addressed by the Romney/Ryan campaign more, but not in a way that makes them seem like they are complaining or whining.

bluegill on October 1, 2012 at 11:34 PM

AS corrupt as the press is, Obama is still below 50%. The country knows how corrupt they are and they’re going to vote accordingly. DOes anyone really know where Romney stands in this race? Romney isn’t about to let his internal polls out, the press claims Obama is ahead by 9 in Ohio, yet Obama is still there campaigning. It’s sort of like the Libya deal, Obama and company trotted out the story about the movie being responsible for it all and, upon just a little reflection, everyone said Bull****. It’s the same thing with the lying polls. The biggest loser in this election isn’t going to be Barack Obama, it’s going to be the White House press corps and their news departments.

Just like they don’t care about Obama, they must not care a bit about their credibility. Oh well, they’re the ones who allowed themselves to become Pravda, now they can reap the benefits.

bflat879 on October 1, 2012 at 11:38 PM

Keep rattling your traps, people. :) It makes a difference.

Axe on October 1, 2012 at 10:07 PM

Hot Gas Sleeper Cell Activation Alert!

Del Dolemonte on October 1, 2012 at 11:43 PM

Harlots for Obama.

Old media, and some new one, what you eat is Obama’s sh*t, not Beluga caviar.

Suffocate, most all of you, from what you eat.

Schadenfreude on October 1, 2012 at 11:44 PM

Is she barefoot behind that desk? Did she kick off her shoes? LOVE THAT!

Tomolena1 on October 1, 2012 at 11:52 PM

urban elitist on October 1, 2012 at 8:47 PM

You are the pimp, not him.

Schadenfreude on October 2, 2012 at 12:06 AM

and betraying what few ideals he might once have had for a few dimes. Sad, really.

urban elitist on October 1, 2012 at 8:47 PM

This is a matter of national security, live and death, ineptitude at the highest levels and you yammer about “ideal”.

God damn you and yours, who are never liberal, nor progressive. May the devil strike you all. You stand for nothing.

Schadenfreude on October 2, 2012 at 12:08 AM

Romney’s statement the morning after the embassy attack is a Very Big Deal with Very Serious Implications for the race, but Obama blowing town to raise some money in Vegas later that night is “curious” or whatever.

Perfect!

Our ambassador’s desecrated body was still warm….Romney states the obvious…bammie lies, and then flies off to “partay” with insanely wealthy liberals in Vegas (where you should never go if you work for a corporation and stuff)….and for the next week the msm is bleating about a “romney gaffe”.

Hilarious.

This was my personal msm moment of the year. Nothing beats it for shear nerve.

Tim_CA on October 2, 2012 at 12:09 AM

Wow…I watched Caddell on Greta tonight. He was the most fired up I’ve ever seen him. If you’ve kept an eye on Caddell the past few weeks/months, I would swear he is going to vote for Romney in November and flip Republican in his party choice. What had him so fired up, is the absolute disgusting, slobbering way that the media is so in the tank for Obama. He was practically frothing at the mouth (for Caddell) on Greta tonight, with disgust at the media. And he’s even making the claims that conservatives are, that the polls are in the fix BY the media for Obama. He’s basically calling an entire corruption of the media on a slippery slope to a state run media. He makes a very good point, too. Caddell also helped make that movie that was supposed to play at the RNC (but got cut due to the restricted time frame) of former Obama supporters who were all voting Romney this time, because of how disillusioned they were with how Obama turned out to REALLY be. That film was absolutely NOT a pro-Obama anything. I think Caddell is voting for Romney. ;)

Highlar on October 2, 2012 at 12:32 AM

urban elitist on October 1, 2012 at 8:47 PM

Even if true, how does that make what he said false?

Baerwulf on October 1, 2012 at 11:24 PM

You will never get any kind of reasonable response. I deal with this with my own effed up lib family. If you make ten coherent points they want eleven or will say “what does it matter”?

arnold ziffel on October 2, 2012 at 12:36 AM

If you read Walter Russell Mead with out knowing his partisan identification, you would be shell shocked to learn that he is a Democrat… this guy continues to surprise me. I am frankly not sure why he calls himself a Democrat when he is so out of step with the standard party line on issues ranging from terrorism to gorebull warming alarmism.

Of course he will be voting for Obama again just as he did in 2008. WRM, literally makes you shake your head in amazement… one of a kind.

nagee76 on October 2, 2012 at 2:02 AM

You know how deeply corrupt American mainstream media is when Pat Caddell and Doug Schoen, two media advisers to former Democrat presidents (!!!) call out the media for its blatant partisanship… wow, just wow.

Btw, i have to get this off my chest – i am from India and i regularly read Indian newspapers and how they treat/cover the current Indian Government, especially our Prime Minister Manmohan Singh.

They do fawn over Obama but are very honest and critical of the current Indian Government and its failings over the last three years – the Congress Government is decidedly Left of Center and our press is not as blatantly liberal/partisan as American media is and most definitely does not run interference or carry water for Manmohan Singh/Sonia Gandhi or any other Congress politician the way American MSM does for Obama, Biden, Hillary, Pelosi et all.

Lets face it… this has been going on for the last five and a half years with respect to Obama and FOREVER with respect to Democrat politicians and Presidents.

India may never be like or catch up with America when it comes to accomplishments, general standard of living, human freedoms etc.
But what we do have is a much more honest and free wheeling press/media which NEVER carried water for ANY administration – right from the darkest days of the Indira Gandhi imposed Emergency to the most feckless administration ever seen in India headed by Manmohan Singh ( both of them are from the Congress party).

There.

nagee76 on October 2, 2012 at 2:28 AM

But what we do have is a much more honest and free wheeling press/media which NEVER carried water for ANY administration – right from the darkest days of the Indira Gandhi imposed Emergency to the most feckless administration ever seen in India headed by Manmohan Singh ( both of them are from the Congress party).

nagee76 on October 2, 2012 at 2:28 AM

Your perspective on the media in India is VERY helpful, nagee76!

Perhaps we can shame the U.S. media into being less biased by comparing the press in various countries around the world.

The British media has certainly been doing a much better job of covering the attacks/protests in Egypt and Libya than the U.S. media recently.

And Univision is taking the lead in investigative reporting of the Fast & Furious scandal.

And Israel has a much more realistic perspective on Iran and the Middle East than the U.S. media.

Some international media competition could be exactly what we need to reduce liberal propaganda in America.

In this age of the global internet the U.S. media will look even sillier than it does now, if it continues to operate as if it had a monopoly on reporting “the truth.”

wren on October 2, 2012 at 3:37 AM

Where are the Washington Post pieces on the fighting valor of the insurgents such as when Bush was President?

Where is the CNN video of American troops being ambushed?

Where is the daily body counts of American dead on the front pages of America’s newspapers?

Where is Harry Reid with his “This war is lost,” when the “Good war” (in Afghanistan) really is almost lost?

Where is the Rep. John Murtha stand-in to launch another investigation into atrocities committed by the Marines?

Where is the CNN reporter who was chastened by being mugged by the Taliban?

Where have all the liberal war reporters gone, long time passing?

The truth is we don’t have a “War on Terror” anymore, but we do have a never ending “War on Bush” (and conservatives) compliments of our liberal media pals.

Is it any wonder this country tilts conservative, yet is warped to the left?

Stepan on October 2, 2012 at 5:04 AM

according to howard dean, brown in deep trouble after last nites debate. he was overbearing and fell into the male trap, when debating a female, of being condescending.

as i figured the story was written even before the debate. so why was brown so frickin’ nice? he shoulda stepped on her neck and called her a fake squaw every other syllable.

renalin on October 2, 2012 at 6:05 AM

Don’t like the job the media is doing?
Write to media and complain:

Email Address of Journalists, News Editors, TV Anchors & Web Reporters

The Free Speech Zone Media Contact List

albill on October 2, 2012 at 6:38 AM

There are too many examples of it to deny it, so why bother denying it? They’ll cop to it in the aggregate, so long as their own personal integrity isn’t questioned. Now if only they’d do something about it.

If you can’t bother to point out the problem and highlight it when you are PART of the MFM, then you have NO personal integrity.

If they did something about it, highlighted it, put a mirror up to themselves and their co-inhabitants of the echo chamber, then they would be demonstrating integrity.

To have integrity it must be demonstrated.

The lack of same becomes obvious by its very lack.

ajacksonian on October 2, 2012 at 6:58 AM

I have always liked Pat Caddell.I don,t agree with him on most political issues but he is a throw back to the days when so called liberal democrats were honest and love the country.remember Scoop Jackson ,Patrick Moynihan and others of that breed of Liberal democrat.They were not socialist/Marxist like most are today.

logman1 on October 2, 2012 at 7:15 AM

Its the 1930′s all over again. Liberals refuse to learn from history.

Bevan on October 2, 2012 at 7:25 AM

if Romney wins, Afghanistan will once again be a matter of pressing national interest subject to “grim milestone” watches on the news rather than the very minor foreign-policy subplot that it’s become

No actually, it won’t. Because the the last four years of meandering, self-ingratiating, idealist failure belong to Mr. Obama. It is a lack of leadership, absenteeism and foreign policy disaster unseen in our history until now. It has made us less safe and in the process demeaned and thrown away the sacrifices made in the name of freedom and our countries safety since September 11th, 2001.

We, and that we includes our military, have suffered and yes, died at the hands of a President who never seems up to the job. His lazy, ineffectual style is the antithesis of what America is all about- hard work, determination and resolve. He has governed from afar and allowed a fawning press and supporters to project his capabilities, which never mirror reality, and in the process escaped the responsibility and criticism which comes with being president.

Whatever the reasons or excuses, our press is culpable in all of this. By that I don’t mean lacking in partisan attacks or overzealous reporting. We’ve had enough of that. I simply mean holding Mr. Obama accountable for his actions, policies or the lack thereof.

The last four years of Mr. Obama’s presidency have left us less safe, with a foreign policy adrift, a dire fiscal situation worsened by any remedy he attempted. He has not only failed to perform the job of president, but left us worse off than when he started. That is certainly deserving of some articulation by a press that seems far to interested in their partisan pursuits and less so in the general good of our country. That’s despicable and they should be loathed for being accomplices in this destruction of the American society.

Marcus Traianus on October 2, 2012 at 8:14 AM

MSM = Obama’s civilian army. Has he armed them yet?

ctmom on October 2, 2012 at 8:15 AM

True That Mr. Caddell.
You are one of the last STRONG liberal men, the rest? mush mouths.

mmcnamer1 on October 2, 2012 at 8:41 AM

All conservative commentators and Romney campaign:

Search and replace: bias CORRUPTION

drunyan8315 on October 2, 2012 at 8:44 AM

Some of Goebbel’s Principles of Propaganda:

1. Propagandist must have access to intelligence concerning events and public opinion.

2. Propaganda must be planned and executed by only one authority.
a. It must issue all the propaganda directives.

b. It must explain propaganda directives to important officials and maintain their morale.

c. It must oversee other agencies’ activities which have propaganda consequences
13. Propaganda must be carefully timed.
a. The communication must reach the audience ahead of competing propaganda.

b. A propaganda campaign must begin at the optimum moment

c. A propaganda theme must be repeated, but not beyond some point of diminishing effectiveness

14. Propaganda must label events and people with distinctive phrases or slogans.
a. They must evoke desired responses which the audience previously possesses

b. They must be capable of being easily learned

c. They must be utilized again and again, but only in appropriate situations

d. They must be boomerang-proof

claudius on October 2, 2012 at 9:02 AM

CNN, ABC, CBS, and NBC know they do this. It is intentional. Calling them out on it isn’t going to change their slant. They don’t care about journalistic ethics. All they care about is influencing the country toward their political slant. We have seen proof in the past where they, along with NYT, Time, Newsweek, and WaPo worked together to coordinate media attacks on Bush.

At some point, I would hope CNN’s financials get so bad that a wealthy set of investors who believe in journalistic neutrality would acquire CNN and detach it from its political bias.

jediwebdude on October 2, 2012 at 9:25 AM

Pat … thank you..

The LAST honest man in the democrat party.. the last classic liberal who valued honesty, integrity..

and the democrats will savage him for it.

if 38% of the public, is so stupid, they can’t see what their party has done to freedom of speech, to honest journalism… they deserve the ruins raining down on them.

mark81150 on October 2, 2012 at 10:43 AM

An honest journalist reports the facts, whether he finds them agreeable or not.

A biased journalist reports the facts he finds agreeable, and avoids reporting those he does not.

A corrupt journalist reports what he is told to report by corrupt politicians.

The majority of the American media is not honest, or merely biased – it is corrupted.

drunyan8315 on October 2, 2012 at 11:04 AM

And for all our complaints about how a particular story is unfairly harsh to Romney, by far the more damaging bias, I think, is when the coverage is unduly disinterested in serious errors made by Obama

I think you mean “uninterested.” Disinterested has always meant “neutral,” “unbiased,” or “no self interest in,” which is the opposite of what you want to convey here. Uninterested means not interested.

jpferman on October 2, 2012 at 11:28 AM

Pat Caddell has still got an impediment to clear thinking, that he thinks all republicans are Richard Nixon, because of his age.

Fleuries on October 2, 2012 at 12:11 PM

Some good news.

JetBlast on October 2, 2012 at 1:05 PM

With the correct link

JetBlast on October 2, 2012 at 1:07 PM

Allahpundit:

So President Romney’s statement the morning after the embassy attack is a Very Big Deal with Very Serious Implications for the race, but Obama blowing town to raise some money in Vegas later that night is “curious” or whatever.

I see what you did there… And I like it.
Come on January!

SnowSun on October 2, 2012 at 2:33 PM

If Pat Caddell wants to be taken seriously, he really needs to get a better rug. Worst. Toupee. Ever.

Drew Lowell on October 2, 2012 at 2:48 PM

I think Joel Pollak is onto something in arguing that the media’s taken to treating Romney as the de facto incumbent, although I can’t decide if that’s something they’re doing consciously or by instinct.

Something is obviously very very wrong with the nation and the MSM cant blame Obama. That would be like blaming themselves.

Meanwhile Obama is running the same ‘change’ campaign he ran before. Of course the press is also running the same ‘change’ campaign they ran before too, so they boxed themselves in.

IMHO we are witnessing a strategy by a pack of very very stupid people because I think they believe their own mantra.

This gives Romney a great advantage to ride the ‘change’ wave by making himself the change. No way can Obama present himself as a change because he has not changed.

The most important change Romney can insert into the show is optimism about America’s future, mixed with warmth, caring, and maturity. He has to show love of country, which means love for the people in the country. Obama does not have the ability to project this warmth – his stories about the ‘little people’ fall flat.

Romney has the heart to show heart and any contrast to the image of Romney created by the MSM will amplify the impact

Reagan’s great secret was that he never criticized the men who ran enemy nations, he criticized the systems which created the men

When Reagan said ‘there you go again’ he made himself a regular guy, he deflated his opponent in the most gentle manner. Had he gone full battle charge against the opponent, the opponent would have gained in stature

Therefore it is important that ROmney watch his body language. He should not make movements towards obama (hostility), give stage laughs or frowns when Obama speaks (mockery). Whatever Obama says it is not worth elevating. The arguments have to be made to the audience and not to obama

THe public assumes the pols dont care or they would have done better. They dont need a WWF match. They need to know someone is here to make things better for them

Argue to the audience and not to Obama. He will shrivel

Pat Caddell is a favorite of mine, rug and all. I am glad FOX lets him have a voice, but he can hardly get a word in edgewise over the screaming FOX Bimbos. Maybe that is a trick to keep the audience coming back. He is a straight talker

entagor on October 2, 2012 at 11:30 PM

Comment pages: 1 2