Way back in October then-Sen. Barack Obama granted a then-rare campaign interview. In which it went to the N.Y. Times Magazine and the candidate reportedly let the writer knew just how he felt:
“I am convinced that if there were no Fox News, I might be two or three points higher in the polls. If I were watching Fox News, I wouldn’t vote for me, right? “Because the way I’m portrayed 24/7 is as a freak! I am the latte-sipping, New York Times-reading, Volvo-driving, no-gun-owning, effete, politically correct, arrogant liberal. Who wants somebody like that?”
It’s not unusual for public figures to feel mis-portrayed or even abused by media organizations. John McCain and his people expressed some strong concerns several times about the same Times newspaper.
President-elect Obama has held four news conferences and two sit-down TV interviews since election day, including three news conferences three days in a row this week. He’s broken the news conference record for all recent presidents-elect.
At these news sessions since Nov. 4, the future commander in chief has answered a total of 22 questions from different reporters. Wednesday, it was NPR, the N.Y. Daily News and CNN.
But not once has the election victor called on a representative of Fox News or given the New York Times any play. It seems as if Obama just don't won't to acknowledge them. Personal I don't blame him for taking that stand. Fox is nothing but a racist hateful network.
President-elect Obama do have a point and who can forget those 24 hr loop of god dam America.Because the way I’m portrayed 24/7 is as a freak! I am the latte-sipping, New York Times-reading, Volvo-driving, no-gun-owning, effete, politically correct, arrogant liberal.
4 comments:
its interesting how almost an entire network could position themselves one way. doesn't seem like good business to me. i guess i'm wrong though, doesn't seem like Fox is hurting for cash.
Hello there!
I think that it is a good thing that racist networks receive CONSEQUENCES for their actions....
I'm of two minds here because I agree he was portrayed wrong but depending on the cable channel you watch they would do the same with McCain. Fox is conservative right leaning and MSNBC is liberal left leaning. I don't watch CNN so I wouldn't know. Obama shouldn't even had made a comment as any Black person would antiicpate a very harsh anti black backlash disguised as any thing they can find.
The Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan "fact tank" that provides information on the issues, attitudes and trends shaping America and the world. It does so by conducting public opinion polling and social science research; by reporting news and analyzing news coverage; and by holding forums and briefings. It does not take positions on policy issues. Pew released a report on campaign media coverage entitled “Winning the Media Campaign: How the Press Reported the 2008 General Election.” That study found that in the media overall—a sample of 43 outlets studied in the six weeks following the conventions through the last debate—Barack Obama’s coverage was somewhat more positive than negative (36% vs. 29%), while John McCain’s, in contrast, was substantially negative (57% vs. 14% positive). The report concluded that this, in significant part, reflected and magnified the horse race and direction of the polls.
•MSNBC stood out for having less negative coverage of Obama than the press generally (14% of stories vs. 29% in the press overall) and for having more negative stories about McCain (73% of its coverage vs. 57% in the press overall).
•On Fox News, in contrast, coverage of Obama was more negative than the norm (40% of stories vs. 29% overall) and less positive (25% of stories vs. 36% generally). For McCain, the news channel was somewhat more positive (22% vs. 14% in the press overall) and substantially less negative (40% vs. 57% in the press overall). Yet even here, McCain’s negative stories outweighed positive ones by almost 2 to 1.
•CNN fell distinctly in the middle of the three cable channels when it came to tone. In general, the tone of its coverage was closer than any other cable news channel to the press overall, though also somewhat more negative than the media overall.
Racism is the belief that the color of skin is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that skin color differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race. People with racist beliefs might hate certain groups of people according to their racial groups, cultural traditions or socio-economic conditions. In the case of institutional racism, certain racial groups may be denied rights or benefits, or get preferential treatment. Based on media studies, Obama’s skin color did not bias media organizations in reporting negative stories about him. Even Fox News produced a sizeable number of positive stories for Obama in comparison to McCain. Upon such studies, it begs the questions, “Which party, Obama or McCain, received a large number of negative biased reports?” and “If McCain, the white candidate, received more negative stories than Obama, the black candidate, then, which of the two received racial preference?” Now that Obama is President-Elect, the blur between the races is becoming fainter. Six press conferences averaging a little more than 3 questions each leave a certain taste of media “honeymoon” overdrive. The arguments for racial bias are becoming weaker in consideration of the media facts and the presence of the first “Black” US President. In fact, we must be concerned that “appearances” of racial hatred be duly investigated by all parties before presenting the propaganda as doctrine.
By the way, to those be smitten with Black Liberation Theology, what happens when the oppressed assume positions of authority? Do we continue to judge “The Man” based on our race? Soon, the media will question whether it is time to move from “quibbles over color” to “sincere discussions about merit”. "The Man" does not usually refer to a specific individual, but instead to the government, leaders of large corporations, and other authority figures in general, such as the police. The Man is colloquially defined as the figurative person who controls our world. The Man is also often used as a symbol of racial oppression, as well as the boss of a blue-collar worker, and the enemy of any counterculture. President Elect Barack Obama is about to become the "leader of the free world" or "the most powerful executive on the planet. The media will soon asks the first “Black” US President how is it that he was only able to find 1 race minority for his first cabinet while George Bush hired 6 race minorities in his first cabinet. Noted journalist Bonnie Erbe has begun asking this question. Is that a racist question or a fair and balanced one? If your answer is that “color” does not matter in picking a cabinet of advisers then, why are we discussing the role of the media in covering Obama? If your answer is that “color” does matter then, why do you not feel slighted that a man that has lived in the Chocolate City—home to the most educated and degreed blacks in America—for at least 3 years is unable to find any minorities, beyond Eric Holder, that is qualified to advise him? This is an especially poignant question to those that say the “Black Church” has groomed his policies and his beliefs. Be careful what you depend on for favor. In the words of the great Pastor T. D. Jakes, “Favor ain’t fair!” What the Media gives, it certainly will take away. Hey, by the way, isn’t Obama "The Man" now?
Post a Comment