# Media bias favors McCain, not Obama **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 28, 2008, 3:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/media-bias-favors-mccain-not-obama/469946 "2008-10-28T15:05:04Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2008, 4:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/media-bias-favors-mccain-not-obama/469946/21 "2008-10-28T16:26:24Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > I’m sure they’ve done pieces of completely non-sequiter humor. > > But no – this political piece was not non-sequiter humor. They were emphasizing the phenomenon that everyone saw by exaggerating it. That’s a very well known approach to humor. Yes – but just because “everyone saw” it does not mean it existed, as you know. ---
**Author:** ![Fish](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/bc8723/32.png) [@Fish](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fish)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2008, 4:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/media-bias-favors-mccain-not-obama/469946/22 "2008-10-28T16:27:41Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > They were emphasizing the phenomenon that **everyone saw** by exaggerating it. So you’re saying “everybody knows” it’s true? Sounds like a stretch to me. “Everybody knows” a lot of things which are bullshit. That’s why the Straight Dope **exists** — to debunk the things which “everybody knows” that aren’t necessarily true. ---
**Author:** ![E.Thorp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/898d66/32.png) [@E.Thorp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/E.Thorp)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2008, 4:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/media-bias-favors-mccain-not-obama/469946/23 "2008-10-28T16:33:21Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > They were emphasizing the phenomenon that everyone saw by exaggerating it. That’s a very well known approach to humor. IIRC they were emphasizing the phenomenon that the Clinton campaign was taking pains to get us to see. I’m not saying it wasn’t there at all, just that there may be another reason “everyone saw” it. Also, bias in the Dem primaries and bias in the general election may be two different things, for much the same reason that Obama may win some states in the general that he lost in the primaries. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2008, 4:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/media-bias-favors-mccain-not-obama/469946/24 "2008-10-28T16:35:13Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > I threw down the gauntlet. If you have a comparable countercite, bring it. Of course, by your standards such a countercite, regardless of the sources or funding or bias or lack of bias of the studies it was based on, would only be credible if it did **not** come from Accuracy in Media or some RW think-tank. Good luck. 😉 You cited an organization specifically set up by the left. That’s not gauntlet, it’s paid political advertisement. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2008, 4:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/media-bias-favors-mccain-not-obama/469946/25 "2008-10-28T16:38:41Z")
Where things get murky is the media need to _appear_ non-partisan. When the news for the McCaininites is running the gamut from bad to very, very bad, that becomes increasingly difficult. Add to that mix the sheer certainty that news media people are wonks, by neccesity. They are immersed in this stuff, drenched in it, it is impossible to expect that they wouldn’t form an opinion. Appearing non-partisan is tougher than it sounds. We monkeys are hard-wired to seek non-verbal clues in posture, facial expressions, etc. If a newsie has formed an opinion, say, in favor of Obama and does his/her level best to present the facts without bias, then they have to _act_, not report. They have to falsify an impartiality that they do not feel. Which is trickier than it sounds. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2008, 4:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/media-bias-favors-mccain-not-obama/469946/26 "2008-10-28T16:45:18Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > You cited an organization specifically set up by the left. That’s not gauntlet, it’s paid political advertisement. They owe me money? 🙂 The content of that article is what’s called content analysis. What the authors consider proof of pro-McCain bias is laid out plain and clear. RW organizations can do their own content analysis if they wish, as can politically neutral scholars (assuming the existence of such) of the media. If they have, by all means bring it. My point remains: What we’ve got this year is either a fair playing field or one that favors the Pubs. Unlike the Dems after the 2000 and 2004 elections, the Pubs will have no reasonable grounds whatsoever to complain of this one, “We wuz robbed!” ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2008, 4:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/media-bias-favors-mccain-not-obama/469946/27 "2008-10-28T16:50:26Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > You cited an organization specifically set up by the left. That’s not gauntlet, it’s paid political advertisement. So how about my Pew Research Center cite saying essentially the same thing? ---
**Author:** ![Bosstone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/22d042/32.png) [@Bosstone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bosstone)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2008, 4:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/media-bias-favors-mccain-not-obama/469946/28 "2008-10-28T16:53:38Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > I guess, when SNL decided to do their skit about the media giving softballs to Obama during his primary fight with Clinton, they were really taking a risk, huh? Since there was no bias, noibody really knew what they’d be talking about. > > How odd that nearly everyone who saw it knew instantly why it was funny. I didn’t see this skit, but I do recall Clinton, or pundits who preferred Clinton, complaining that she was being picked on unfairly for being a woman. Could that have been part of the joke as well? Sort of a “What is the airspeed of an unladen swallow” versus “What is your favorite color” thing. ---
**Author:** ![Jack\_Batty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jack_batty/32/3201_2.png) [@Jack\_Batty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jack_Batty)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2008, 4:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/media-bias-favors-mccain-not-obama/469946/29 "2008-10-28T16:55:20Z")
One might also point out that SNL is not a news organization. They can be as biased as they please, as long as they keep the revenue stream flowing. ---
**Author:** ![kidchameleon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/898d66/32.png) [@kidchameleon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kidchameleon)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2008, 5:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/media-bias-favors-mccain-not-obama/469946/30 "2008-10-28T17:02:38Z")
> [@Revtim](#): > > One of the Keating Five running for president is kinda new… …nearly a decade ago. ---
**Author:** ![Syntropy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/65b543/32.png) [@Syntropy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Syntropy)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2008, 5:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/media-bias-favors-mccain-not-obama/469946/31 "2008-10-28T17:17:36Z")
> [@Jack\_Batty](#): > > One might also point out that SNL is not a news organization. They can be as biased as they please, as long as they keep the revenue stream flowing. I think that’s the case for a lot of MSM, as well. I do wonder if 24/7 news outlets haven’t killed what they claim to espouse. “News never sleeps,” but it does occasionally take a breath. What do you do when there is nothing newsworthy going on? Plug the holes in your lineup with people like Joe Scarborough or Keith Olbermann and call it “news,” and don’t even bother running a disclaimer that what’s being reported is opinion. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2008, 5:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/media-bias-favors-mccain-not-obama/469946/32 "2008-10-28T17:22:11Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > So how about my Pew Research Center cite saying essentially the same thing? I’m confused as to your point. Your site showed repressed information on Obama by the media. ---
**Author:** ![Dan\_Norder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/4af34b/32.png) [@Dan\_Norder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dan_Norder)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2008, 5:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/media-bias-favors-mccain-not-obama/469946/33 "2008-10-28T17:31:43Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > They were emphasizing the phenomenon that everyone saw No, they were dramatizing a claim that Hillary supporters had already made, which was bullshit… which was why it was funny. ---
**Author:** ![eleanorigby](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/ee7513/32.png) [@eleanorigby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eleanorigby)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2008, 5:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/media-bias-favors-mccain-not-obama/469946/34 "2008-10-28T17:37:39Z")
> [@Jack\_Batty](#): > > I’ll say it again … conservatives claim a liberal mainstream media bias solely because the mainstream media is \*not \*conservative. > > It doesn’t matter how down the middle any reporting is, if they don’t support the right, in their minds they are automatically supporting the left. > > When Limbaugh and his ilk spew their bullshit it’s considered fair and true because it’s what they want to hear. When CNN floats a headline that doesn’t trash the left, it’s not what the want to hear, ergo, biased. > I really don’t think a lot of conservatives know what “bias” means most of the time. This is way too sensible to be accepted as true. But good try! ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2008, 5:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/media-bias-favors-mccain-not-obama/469946/35 "2008-10-28T17:44:19Z")
> [@kidchameleon](#): > > …nearly a decade ago. > [@Magiver](#): > > I’m confused as to your point. Your site showed repressed information on Obama by the media. ::sigh:: I’ll try this once again…read their conclusions (bolding mine to help): > [@](#): > > One question likely to be posed is whether these findings provide evidence that the news media are pro-Obama. Is there some element in these numbers that reflects a rooting by journalists for Obama and against McCain, unconscious or otherwise? **The data do not provide conclusive answers.** ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2008, 5:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/media-bias-favors-mccain-not-obama/469946/36 "2008-10-28T17:47:06Z")
> [@Jack\_Batty](#): > > One might also point out that SNL is not a news organization. They can be as biased as they please, as long as they keep the revenue stream flowing. Sure. And relevant, too… if only I had claimed that SNL was biased. But I’m offering that observation to prove only that the SNL writers knew everyone seeing the sketch would think it was funny _because they had already seen to bias at work_ in real life. ---
**Author:** ![Jack\_Batty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jack_batty/32/3201_2.png) [@Jack\_Batty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jack_Batty)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2008, 6:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/media-bias-favors-mccain-not-obama/469946/37 "2008-10-28T18:03:43Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Sure. And relevant, too… if only I had claimed that SNL was biased. > > But I’m offering that observation to prove only that the SNL writers knew everyone seeing the sketch would think it was funny _because they had already seen to bias at work_ in real life. It’s still merely some comedy writer’s point of view, not a universal truth. You could just as well make the argument that they are making fun of the \*perception \*of media bias. ---
**Author:** ![Fish](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/bc8723/32.png) [@Fish](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fish)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2008, 6:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/media-bias-favors-mccain-not-obama/469946/38 "2008-10-28T18:08:23Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > But I’m offering that observation to prove only that the SNL writers knew everyone seeing the sketch would think it was funny _because they had already seen to bias at work_ in real life. This suggests that George W. Bush really is an idiot, and that Palin really is a bubblehead — because if SNL is making fun of it, it must be based on a commonly understood truth. Or is it possible that they are using humor to exaggerate a popular _perception?_ Or to lampoon the complaints about bias? Or to provide an amusing contrast? Is it conceivable that the focus of their humor is **not** media bias (as you allege) but to highlight the readiness of the candidates? Let me counter this with another example from _[Entertainment Weekly](http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,20229133,00.html)_: > [@EW](#): > > ‘‘Senator Biden, please discuss the resurgence of Taliban militias in Afghanistan’s Bajaur region; Governor Palin, please spell ‘region.’’’ The above quote represents a question that Stephen Colbert’s writers hoped would be asked at the VP debates. Does this represent a) an example of right-wing media bias, lobbing softballs to the Republican candidate, or b) a mockery of Palin’s unpreparedness? ---
**Author:** ![kidchameleon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/898d66/32.png) [@kidchameleon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kidchameleon)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2008, 6:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/media-bias-favors-mccain-not-obama/469946/39 "2008-10-28T18:28:26Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > ::sigh:: > > I’ll try this once again…read their conclusions (bolding mine to help): Oh yeah, you got me there. Since the data do not provide conclusive answers, this has altered the past and John McCain didn’t run for the presidency back in 2000. Way to fight ignorance! ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2008, 6:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/media-bias-favors-mccain-not-obama/469946/40 "2008-10-28T18:31:12Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > I’m sure they’ve done pieces of completely non-sequiter humor. > > But no – this political piece was not non-sequiter humor. They were emphasizing the phenomenon that everyone saw by exaggerating it. That’s a very well known approach to humor. They also used to do a lot of sketches about how Gerald Ford was a total klutz. This despite the fact that he was a talented college football player who passed up a career in the NFL to attend law school. But, hey, they had Chevy Chase fall on a Christmas tree in a sketch once, so clearly Ford was a stumblebum who couldn’t cross the room with tripping over his own feet. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/media-bias-favors-mccain-not-obama/469946.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/media-bias-favors-mccain-not-obama/469946.md?page=3)