Why is this in the Elections forum?
It seems to me that there is generally a balance in the guests. What galls me is that whenever the camera is turned onto the Republican, the FIRST thing they do is start going through their prepared talking points, regardless of what the question was. Kelly Ayotte was a perfect example of this a week ago. Christ what a perfectly programmed little bitch, auditioning for the veep slot.
Do you think that the ads aren’t representative of what the two campaigns are actually running? If they are representative, then the Romney campaign has nothing to cry about.
Do you KNOW what the QUEERS are DOING to the SOIL!!!
Ludovic, I like you. You’re not like the other people…
The key is what questions get asked. If you have a good interviewer, they can ask the important questions of anybody regardless of whatever party affiliations may be involved. Chris Matthews has a background in Democratic Party politics and he’s a moron - loud, obnoxious, in love with the sound of his own voice, excitable, shallow, fascinated by the useless parts of politics and incapable of real analysis. Tim Russert had a background in Democratic Party politics and most people felt he became a serious journalist and a good interviewer.
Yes. Except for Crowley and Zakaria, they’re all older white guys.
Dunno; the mods didn’t want to move it for fear that he’d open another ATMB thread about the move, and they don’t want him overexposed in that forum?
Because until Election Day on Tuesday, November 6th, every Sunday, and by extension every Sunday morning talk show, will involve the 2012 election.
Because they want to be quoted in the Monday paper the next day.
Yes. Just like during the week, Monday thorugh Friday, semi-serious people watch Good Morning America while serious people finish getting their news when Good Morning Ameirca begins.
Interestingly, one way to make yourself suddenly less popular with the Sunday shows is to be pushing a book claiming that no, both parties aren’t actually equally to blame, and the media’s insistence that they are is part of the problem. As Norman Ornstein and Thomas Mann seem to be finding out.
Most telling:
Here’s your answer, What. The bias comes from the editors. But it ain’t LW bias, it’s “Fair and Balanced” bias. :rolleyes:
From where I sit, it’s not a Great Debate and it’s not an IMHO topic. It doesn’t fit perfectly into this forum either, but it may as well stay here as far as I’m concerned. It does relate to “political news, and politicians and public figures.”
Let’s be clear about what just happened. Norman Ornstein is from a right wing think tank -AEI. Thomas Mann is from a centrist think tank - Brookings.[1] Ornstein is a popular talking head. They just wrote a book which is getting unusually popular relative to their typical stuff - 200,000 hits at Facebook. Reporters are aware of the problem they face.
And yet… radio silence. No bookings on any Sunday talk show. It’s too hot to handle, too disturbing for modern conservative mentality. Editors know that they would face intense hissy fits if they …report the facts.
The editors know their market: American liberals are simply made of sturdier stuff on average than conservatives. Conservative news consumers seek reassurance: they are puerile in that way. Liberals just want the hard-hitting facts.
I have a copy of the book with me. It looks pretty good: it has a blurb by Paul Volker in the back. It opens with a Jan 26, 2010 vote on a resolution to create an 18 member deficit reduction task force. Earlier it had gotten bipartisan support, working up to the top to John McCain and Mitch McConnell. And yet the Republicans filibustered the resolution that day: the Dems couldn’t garner a single Republican vote that would allow debate to be stopped. That’s right. John McCain plus 6 republican co-sponsors filibustered their own bill. Don’t want to give Obama a victory, you see.
But don’t expect to learn that on the TV. News editors have to tip-toe around the delicate feelings of the modern conservative. Heck, some of them even tear up with regards to the bias of Sunday talk shows.
The name of the book is It’s Even Worse Than It Looks: How the American Constitutional System Collided With the New Politics of Extremism. It’s ranked number 8 among political books and number 77 overall at Amazon.
[1] Calling Brookings ultra-liberal would be pretty silly given their advocacy of the Iraq War.
Advertisers buy advertising time and choose the ads they wish to run. Do you think that the Romney campaign wanted to run a different ad and the network insisted on this one instead?
I don’t think anyone does, but you seem to. Do tell.
Stare at it long enough and you will see the sailboat!
Agreed… I liked Tim Russert. Chris Matthews doesn’t belong hosting anywhere other than MSNBC.
Politics… Sunday Morning Political Shows… Democrats/Republicans …get it?
Where does it belong The Pit?
And not very serious people at all keep tuned in for The View.
That would apply to the campaign commercials they pick but not to the way hosts ask questions and the way they follow up… or not.
The show picked the “commercials” as lead-ins to the segment… they weren’t run as commercials as such.
One was a feel good spot… the other was just a tad nasty although 100% true. Something a bully would run.