Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 11-27-2019, 10:49 PM
Barack Obama is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 567

Mainstream Media misleading voters on candidate popularity.


Recently Andrew Yang has came out and made a point about MSNBC not showing him in polling where he did better than the candidates on air, as well as giving him less than half the time to speak during debates compared to other candidates, and not asking any questions relating to his campaign's policies.

Is this a problem? I don't favor Yang, I disagree with his implementation of UBI, I would give UBI to everyone below a certain median, and I would not allow opt in/opt out all subsidized aid programs like SNAP or Section 8 would still be kept while receiving that UBI. I also know he's not in the top 3, but he's been fighting to get his 8 or 9%. And I think this is an important topic, mainstream media has too much influence over voters to go unchecked. MSNBC needs to apologize and admit what they're doing, and that it's wrong.

That goes for every other mainstream media.
  #2  
Old 11-27-2019, 11:42 PM
ITR champion is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Indiana
Posts: 10,390
In case anyone hasn't seen it, the many cases of anti-Yang bias at MSNBC and CNN (and even one from the Weather Channel) are documented here: https://vocal.media/theSwamp/a-visua...media-blackout

Of course, Republicans and independents have known since forever that the media has a shameless bias in favor of mainstream Democratic candidates and ideas, and against anyone and anything which questions them. Now a small sliver of Democrats are seeing it clearly.
  #3  
Old 11-28-2019, 12:03 AM
Palooka is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Eastern Ontario
Posts: 2,570
Is there a particular MSNBC would want to snub Yang? I'd assume they're ignoring him because he's a seemingly inconsequential candidate with terrible polls in a crowded race.
  #4  
Old 11-28-2019, 01:30 AM
dalej42 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 14,922
Yang has a cult and that’s it. Him being ‘ignored’ is just sour grapes, no one really cares about all the candidates in the bottom tier.

Plus, Yang punches way above his weight on Twitter.
__________________
Twitter:@Stardales IG:@Dalej42
  #5  
Old 11-28-2019, 01:39 AM
Heffalump and Roo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,297
What Andrew Yang posted about MSNBC:

Quote:
Was asked to appear on @msnbc
this weekend - and told them that I’d be happy to after they apologize on-air, discuss and include our campaign consistent with our polling, and allow surrogates from our campaign as they do other candidates’. They think we need them. We don’t.

They’ve omitted me from their graphics 12+ times, called me John Yang on air, and given me a fraction of the speaking time over 2 debates despite my polling higher than other candidates on stage. At some point you have to call it.

More people talking about it.

Ian Bremmer of GZero Media:

Quote:
Why does @MSNBC
keep leaving out @AndrewYang
on their graphics?

It’s starting to look more intentional than unprofessional.

Krystal Ball
on The Hill:

Quote:
This takes courage to say but it needed to be said. Thank you @AndrewYang
! When media silences outsider voices it is a disservice to us all!

Judge Alex Ferrer
(Host and Executive Producer of “Whistleblower” on CBS, former host of the nationally syndicated court show “Judge Alex”) [on leaving Yang out of graphics]:

Quote:
Let’s say it’s incompetence—why would you trust them with the news?
Let’s say it’s not incompetence, it’s intentional—why would you trust them with the news?
#AndrewYang

Cenk Uygur
on TYT:

Quote:
I love what Andrew Yang did there. It was a Yangster move.
Cenk made the point that an ad on MSM could cost hundreds of thousands of dollars, so leaving off any candidate who is polling higher than others is giving the other free advertising worth millions of dollars.

A Yang Ganger:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Caitlyn Germain
Phonebanked a bit tonight. Everyone I talked to was OUTRAGED that @AndrewYang
only got 6 mins of talking time-but yet knew nothing else about him.... THE PEOPLE ARE WATCHING YOU NOW, @MSNBC
! The wave is about to break!

Some Bernie supporters
have joined into the boycott hashtag in solidarity because Bernie has been left out of the media a lot as well.

Nate Silver
on 538:

Quote:
What should Andrew Yang be thankful for this Thanksgiving?
. . . But I don't know that he has a lot to be thankful for. I mean, I somewhat actually buy that the media has been, you know, relatively dismissive of his candidacy. . . . The media has been relatively dismissive of Andrew Yang's candidacy. You can quote me on that.
  #6  
Old 11-28-2019, 03:56 AM
Unreconstructed Man is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 425
There’s no doubt Yang (as well as Sanders and Gabbard) has been ignored, misrepresented, and under-represented by MSNBC. The question is “Are they deliberately biased in favour of candidates approved by the DNC? Or are they just massively, shamefully stupid, unprofessional and incompetent in this one very specific area?”

I don’t like Yang. I think his signature policy is stupid and unworkable. I’ve no reason to fight his corner. But even I’ve been a bit taken aback by how shabbily he’s been treated by MSNBC.
  #7  
Old 11-28-2019, 05:12 AM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: The Land of Smiles
Posts: 20,187
Quote:
Originally Posted by Palooka View Post
Is there a particular MSNBC would want to snub Yang? I'd assume they're ignoring him because he's a seemingly inconsequential candidate with terrible polls in a crowded race.
But he has a very strong following, ardent admirers. Despite the lack of media attention he is polling ahead of Booker and Klobuchar, who are still treated as serious candidates; and IIRC he has now pulled almost even with Harris.

Part of the problem is that his message doesn't fit into well-worn channels. Anything unfamiliar is treated as crackpottery. As I've mentioned in other threads, it often seems that America has never been stupider and more poorly informed than now, in the so-called Information Age.

His message about the need for a new economic paradigm is important — far more important than blah-blah-blah about M4A or gun control details. While a long-shot, he probably has one of the higher IQs of the candidates. One thing he is NOT is a "nutjob."

But I'll guess MSNBC and CNN don't have a special nefarious agenda. Wasn't it William of Ockham who said "Do not ascribe to malice that which can be explained by ordinary incompetence and stupidity." ?

We saw something similar by FoxNews in the previous cycle: Fox totally ignored Ron Paul, while hanging on to every tweet or fart by Sarah Palin. At least Paul had ideas (admittedly every single idea was a stupid idea) while Palin was an utterly laughable bloviating imbecile without a single discernible idea, yet Fox was rooting for her to enter the race!

Last edited by septimus; 11-28-2019 at 05:16 AM.
  #8  
Old 11-28-2019, 05:19 AM
nightshadea is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: a condo in hell 10th lvl
Posts: 5,942
didnt sanders complain of the same thing last election? that if he held an event hed get 5 minutes if he was lucky but Hillary could drive through a town and not stop but it was covered like the second coming?
  #9  
Old 11-28-2019, 11:38 AM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 18,791
Quote:
Originally Posted by nightshadea View Post
didnt sanders complain of the same thing last election? that if he held an event hed get 5 minutes if he was lucky but Hillary could drive through a town and not stop but it was covered like the second coming?
This is kind of different. That can be somewhat excused, they're choosing their content on what they think people want to see. Yang is being bizarrely and frequently just left off lists of the candidates. Look at the link ITR champion posted.
  #10  
Old 11-28-2019, 12:03 PM
msmith537 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 27,751
This is spot on. I would have had no idea how much I didn't care about Yang until I came across this thread.

Maybe they are ignoring Yang because he is polling a distant fifth or sixth place in a contest where there can be only one winner?
  #11  
Old 11-28-2019, 12:13 PM
Siam Sam is offline
Elephant Whisperer
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Honolulu, Hawaii
Posts: 41,176
I for one love Andrew Yang. His addition to the Saturday Night Live cast adds more diversity.
__________________
The two most interesting things in the world: Other people's sex lives and your own money.
  #12  
Old 11-28-2019, 12:18 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 18,791
Quote:
Originally Posted by msmith537 View Post
This is spot on. I would have had no idea how much I didn't care about Yang until I came across this thread.

Maybe they are ignoring Yang because he is polling a distant fifth or sixth place in a contest where there can be only one winner?
No, that's not it. Unless other hopeless candidates are frequently left off the graphics - hopeless candidates are certainly on the graphics presented in ITR's linked article. That could be happening though, for all I know. These other nobodies don't have a twitter army watching every move.

A Visual History of the #YangMediaBlackout

Last edited by CarnalK; 11-28-2019 at 12:20 PM. Reason: added link
  #13  
Old 11-28-2019, 12:28 PM
Gyrate is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Greater Croydonia
Posts: 24,108
I'd like to go on the record as saying:

1) I too don't care about Yang, think his policies are unworkable and his campaign a vanity project; and
2) He should be treated the same as other candidates polling at the same levels as him.

If enough people want Yang, then he should receive appropriate and fair treatment by the media.
  #14  
Old 11-28-2019, 01:29 PM
Thing Fish is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago (NL)
Posts: 3,546
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gyrate View Post
I'd like to go on the record as saying:

1) I too don't care about Yang, think his policies are unworkable and his campaign a vanity project; and
2) He should be treated the same as other candidates polling at the same levels as him.

If enough people want Yang, then he should receive appropriate and fair treatment by the media.
Yeah, +1. The links provided by the OP make a pretty good case that he's being treated unfairly. One wonders if all the other minor candidates could come up with a similar list of "snubs" if they tried. But if Nate Silver agrees that Yang isn't being treated fairly, I'll buy that it's a real thing.

And it's a real problem, not because it affects Yang's nonexistent chances of winning the nomination, but because it makes people mistrust the mainstream media, making them more likely to embrace weird conspiracy theories. We certainly saw this in the last cycle with Bernie supporters getting justifiably angry at his dismissive treatment.

But as a Bernie supporter, I'm happy to say that things seem better this time around. The media seem to have gotten used to the idea that Bernie is a power player and are treating him more fairly. Hopefully it won't take them as long to get up to speed with Yang.
  #15  
Old 11-28-2019, 02:01 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 18,791
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thing Fish View Post
Yeah, +1. The links provided by the OP make a pretty good case that he's being treated unfairly. One wonders if all the other minor candidates could come up with a similar list of "snubs" if they tried. But if Nate Silver agrees that Yang isn't being treated fairly, I'll buy that it's a real thing.
I don't trust Silver's opinion on this anymore than any other newswatcher, unless he's actually done real homework on it. It would be nice if someone besides the Yang Gang dug in. I certainly doubt Harris or Booker were ever left off a candidate list, the two in his polling tier. But I also doubt Booker or Harris is getting much more coverage nowadays than Yang.
  #16  
Old 11-28-2019, 06:58 PM
Kent Clark's Avatar
Kent Clark is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Posts: 27,118
Quote:
Originally Posted by septimus View Post
His message about the need for a new economic paradigm is important — far more important than blah-blah-blah about M4A or gun control details.
In your opinion. In my opinion, making sure my children can be assured of affordable health care, and reducing senseless slaughter is far more important than some blue-sky blah blah about a new economic paradigm.

I suspect that more people agree with me than with you, which may explain why Yang is polling at 3%.

Interestingly, here's an article that makes a strong case that Yang is being ignored by the mainstream media. It's from the Sinclair Broadcast Group - you may recall them ordering every one of their anchors at every station to read, exactly as written, an editorial decrying fake news.

When a group that's at least as conservative as Fox News, except sneakier about it, starts defending a progressive Democrat, let's just say I defend the defense "insincere."
  #17  
Old 11-28-2019, 07:00 PM
Velocity is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 15,811
I don't like this trend by the mainstream media where they basically seem to think that they are unofficial DNC superdelegates or some quasi-DNC and it's their job to "vet" which candidates are suitable and mainstream enough to serve as the (D) nominee. I get that Yang's UBI idea is considered too radical for our time as of yet, and that he is seen as a not-so-serious candidate who has little to talk about or offer other than UBI, but still, it's not the MSM's job to do vetting.
  #18  
Old 11-28-2019, 07:08 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 18,791
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocity View Post
I don't like this trend by the mainstream media where they basically seem to think that they are unofficial DNC superdelegates or some quasi-DNC and it's their job to "vet" which candidates are suitable and mainstream enough to serve as the (D) nominee. I get that Yang's UBI idea is considered too radical for our time as of yet, and that he is seen as a not-so-serious candidate who has little to talk about or offer other than UBI, but still, it's not the MSM's job to do vetting.
As far as I know, it's only MSNBC that has been making these frankly baffling omissions in their graphics. Do you have some neutral like cite about mainstream media doing anything as bad?
  #19  
Old 11-28-2019, 07:40 PM
Boycott is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 299
Joe Biden takes Yang seriously. There's some clips of Yang saying Biden's the candidate he is friendliest with as Biden was the only candidate who engaged with him at events from the beginning, beyond a handshake and some pleasantries. That when Biden talks to candidates he asks more questions to Yang than he does to sitting US Senators so it gave Yang confidence that if a former VP values his contribution he doesn't care if others scoff. And of course Yang is now polling above sitting US Senators.
  #20  
Old 11-28-2019, 08:50 PM
PhillyGuy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Pennsylvania U.S.A.
Posts: 1,483
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barack Obama View Post
That goes for every other mainstream media.
Judging media fairly is difficult because of our own personal biases.

Judging all mainstream media is impossible because of the required level of effort.
  #21  
Old 11-29-2019, 02:08 AM
Heffalump and Roo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,297
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarnalK View Post
I don't trust Silver's opinion on this anymore than any other newswatcher, unless he's actually done real homework on it. It would be nice if someone besides the Yang Gang dug in. I certainly doubt Harris or Booker were ever left off a candidate list, the two in his polling tier. But I also doubt Booker or Harris is getting much more coverage nowadays than Yang.
You can check out the data yourself. 538 does a report every week on 2020 Presidential candidate mentions in the media. Notice how the polling can vary with the amount of mentions. I was looking at Gabbard's rise in the polls and think it was right after the increase in mentions.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/tag/media/

These reports only go to the end of October 2019, from what I could find. But I know that Nerds for Yang just did an analysis of mentions in November. I don't know where he got his information. You can watch his analysis of the mentions on this video starting at 24:30.

If I come across where Tom from Nerds for Yang is getting his data, I'll post it here.

The difficulty in comparing Yang with Booker and Harris is that they're US Senators, so they're going to be mentioned in the media more for that reason. That's why Yang didn't mention that. But if you compare him with people like Buttigieg or Steyer, you might be able to come to some conclusions. You'd still have to know what was going on in the news that week to rule out why they'd be mentioned for anything other than the campaign.
  #22  
Old 11-29-2019, 07:08 PM
RioRico is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: beyond cell service
Posts: 752
Questions arise.

Does "mainstream media" mean what's supplied to the largest US audiences?
Are we supposed to judge a candidate's quality by their alleged popularity?
And will numbers reported now be relevant when state primaries start?

I have no opinion of Mr Yang. I don't watch TV news, but read websites and skip most videos and all podcasts. Media sources tailor product for their desired audiences. Perhaps the accused MSMs here judged Mr Yang unsuited to grab eyeballs to sell to advertisers. That's a business decision, yes?
  #23  
Old 11-29-2019, 07:41 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 18,791
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heffalump and Roo View Post
You can check out the data yourself. 538 does a report every week on 2020 Presidential candidate mentions in the media. Notice how the polling can vary with the amount of mentions. I was looking at Gabbard's rise in the polls and think it was right after the increase in mentions.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/tag/media/
Do you have a link to the data, rather than to a search of every article on the entire website that discusses media?
  #24  
Old 11-29-2019, 08:31 PM
Velocity is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 15,811
Quote:
Originally Posted by RioRico View Post
Media sources tailor product for their desired audiences. Perhaps the accused MSMs here judged Mr Yang unsuited to grab eyeballs to sell to advertisers. That's a business decision, yes?
Well then, that leads to the question: Why does the MSM think Yang is unsuited to grab eyeballs? They have no problem showing candidates in their graphics who are polling lower than him.

The only thing that stands out about Yang that would make him different (and therefore unsuitable) is his UBI, and.........something else.
  #25  
Old 11-29-2019, 08:37 PM
TimeWinder is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Albany/Corvallis, OR
Posts: 4,792
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kent Clark View Post
When a group that's at least as conservative as Fox News, except sneakier about it, starts defending a progressive Democrat, let's just say I defend the defense "insincere."
Uh, aren't these (conservatives, not Sinclair specifically) the same people who spread enough nonsense last election about Bernie being mistreated to give the election to our current so-called President? Why would it surprise you in the least that they'd do it again? They don't care about Yang, or even about the facts. They care about sowing dissent and confusion.

Last edited by TimeWinder; 11-29-2019 at 08:38 PM.
  #26  
Old 11-30-2019, 12:55 AM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: The Land of Smiles
Posts: 20,187
Quote:
Originally Posted by msmith537 View Post
This is spot on. I would have had no idea how much I didn't care about Yang until I came across this thread.

Maybe they are ignoring Yang because he is polling a distant fifth or sixth place in a contest where there can be only one winner?
I watched one CNN clip where ten candidates were reviewed one-by-one in order of polling. Yang was well above the bottom of that pack. Yet the CNN reporter passed over Yang — despite his image right there on the screen's graphic — not even mentioning his name. This might have been the same CNN reporter who had only condescending insults when he interviewed Yang, and then baffled confusion as Yang's answers outsmarted him.

Look: Yang was never going to win the nomination. The U.S. has more urgent concerns over the next four years than UBI. We get it.

But top economists on both the left and the right have been espousing some form of "basic income" for decades. Yang is one of the smartest persons on the stage. Yet Dopers follow the lead of CNN and MSNBC and can speak only dismissively of Yang. One Doper had kind words for Gary Johnson — — but called Yang a "nutjob."

I like to think SDMB is intelligent and objective. Quit letting me down.
  #27  
Old 11-30-2019, 07:42 AM
JKellyMap's Avatar
JKellyMap is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 9,875
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocity View Post
Well then, that leads to the question: Why does the MSM think Yang is unsuited to grab eyeballs? They have no problem showing candidates in their graphics who are polling lower than him.

The only thing that stands out about Yang that would make him different (and therefore unsuitable) is his UBI, and.........something else.
I think you have a point here, about possible underlying, mild, but real racial bias. It’s hard to disentangle from the fact that Yang hasn’t held any sort of elected office, though, so I would only compare him to (say) Williamson or Steyer, not to (say) Buttegeig or Deval Patrick or Klobuchar.
  #28  
Old 11-30-2019, 10:44 AM
E-DUB's Avatar
E-DUB is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 4,892
Quote:
Originally Posted by septimus View Post
But he has a very strong following, ardent admirers. Despite the lack of media attention he is polling ahead of Booker and Klobuchar, who are still treated as serious candidates; and IIRC he has now pulled almost even with Harris.
I don't think that he's so much pulled even with Harris as Harris has plunged to his level.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:43 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017