Skip to comments.Post-Election Survey: Voters Have No Confidence in Media
Posted on 11/08/2012 6:25:02 AM PST by Evil Slayer
Rush Limbaugh calls them "Democrats with bylines."
Most voters who watched the second Presidential debate saw CNN's Candy Crowley jump in and bail out President Barack Obama when he stumbled on Benghazi and correctly concluded she was biased in his favor.
Many conservatives noticed how the mainstream media has played the role of Nixon's henchmen rather than Woodward and Bernstein in the Benghazi coverup and reporting on the Hurricane Sandy federal response debacle.
Now a new survey completed by Breitbart News and Judicial Watch on election night confirms that most voters have no confidence in the media. As the press release announcing the results stated:
77% of voters agreed with the statement: The press is more likely to favor one candidate for office over another at the expense of their journalistic objectivity. (emphasis added)
More than half--57%--strongly agreed, while only 7% strongly disagreed.
While 92% of Republicans agreed with the statement that the media was biased in favor of one candidate over another, a surprising 58% of Democrats shared that sentiment. Among Independents, 77% agreed that there was media bias.
There was little difference between the genders, as well. 80% of men and 74% of women agreed that the media favored one candidate over the other.
Skepticism of the media's objectivity is highest among the youngest. 81% of voters aged 18-34 agreed that the media favored one candidate over the other.
High levels of media distrust, especially among younger voters, suggest that it will be increasingly difficult in future campaigns for the mainstream media to get away with the blatant bias they exhibited in the 2012 Presidential election. While it's likely that media bias influenced the outcome of the election, voters were keenly aware of what the media was doing.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
or, may I add, in government!
The most disturbing thing however is the electorate that voted to continue the failed policies of the past four years!
People say that and then they fall for the media spin every time.
I watched ABC for part of the election night coverage, and they didn’t even try to hide their pro-Obama bias and the excitement as it became obvious that he was going to win. One reporter was talking to people in Times Square and one young woman said she had voted for Romney. The reporter arched his brow, smirked, and said, “Well, we’ve found ONE person who voted for Mitt Romney.” The woman, already nervous about being on TV, seemed humiliated.
I don’t watch network news often. Something about the whole presentation struck me as odd and I had a moment of deja vu. There used to be a TV station here that showed foreign news programs, including “Vesti” (News) from back in the USSR days. That’s what ABC reminded me of.
Pat Cadell had it right when he stated, “The mainstream media has become the enemy of the State.”
Look at the dripping as*holes that let the Obama/Christie photo-op decide their vote.
The Media was all in for the Communist and the voters sure as heck followed.
Too many citizens want nothing to do with politics so they never turn their TV channels to better news after watching American Idol (or whatever other mind numbing program is a hit).
“Just because you do not take an interest in politics doesn't mean politics won't take an interest in you.” —Pericles (430 B.C.)
Until someone in the GOP figures out how to make better use of media other than the MSM, there will be trouble.
Right now the door is open for someone to put him/herself out before the public - all of the public, the whole demographic spread! - through different media in order to 1) educate people as to the real issues that face the nation, 2) propose realistic solutions to those issues that accord with the founding documents of our nation, and in doing so, 3) become a familiar and welcome voice by the time the next election rolls around. In other words, do what Ronald Reagan did before 1980, but without trying to be Reagan II (wouldn’t be possible).
If there were smart people in the party, who could connect to moneyed people, there are a handful of candidates right now who fit that profile. Pick the very best of them and get moving. By best I mean one who speaks the language of conservatism because he/she thinks conservatism, and who is at the same time appealing, well-spoken, possesses a sense of humor and an air of optimism, and has a spine.
At the same time, put in place a shadow RNC chairman (Priebus is a failure) who will find out the real plans and tactics of the other side and then figure out the best way to counteract it so that when the GOP candidate is determined the campaign can truly get to work on what it actually needs to do instead of simply spending gobs of money on foolishness.
Finally, realize that presidential politics is not business, nor is it simply money, though principles from both apply. Politics is the art of connecting to the hearts and minds of people. To do so on the presidential level means that you have to have someone very special. So, GOP, you have been bloodied twice now by a person whose policies are antithetical to the principles on which the nation was founded and, in some cases, even destructive and lacking in common sense that anyone should be able to grasp.
What are you going to do?
If you show yourselves not up to the job, well, the number of - and seriousness of the threat posed by - the Pauls and Cains of this nation will only grow.
The press is more likely to favor one candidate for office over another at the expense of their journalistic objectivity.
The statement is so generic that it lacks substantial meaning. If the statement was “The major networks create scandals involving conservatives, but spike scandals involving liberals.” It might mean something.
So what. It doesn’t matter. The old media still drives the narrative with what it chooses to cover. It’s not the talking heads. It’s what shots they show, and don’t show, during Sandy and Katrina.
The public may distrust but it makes no difference. According to Frank Luntz, exit polls show that more than 50% of the late breakers in this election identified Zero’s treatment of Sandy as their major decision point.
“People say that and then they fall for the media spin every time.”
Exactly. They say they don’t trust the media, and I think at some conscious or sub-conscious level that bit of rational thought process exists where they know they are being manipulated. The problem is that the media has become so adept at using the tools of psychological programming, the average person is powerless to resist. Thus they cannot connect their distrust into action, and are just being herded. Even sheep don’t like being herded, but it’s not in their nature to resist.
You areright. From what I hear, the MSM showed very little of the aftermath and misery days later. They just focused on Christie bloviating and praising Obama’s wonderful job.
That is how they do it. They covered the storm, but after Obama’s photo op, they were done with it.
I noticed all the articles today where the MSM is saying “don’t blame us”. What a pathetic joke.
Since 2000 I’ve turned off the TV and followed every election on the Salem Radio Network, either via radio or online. Had enough of cable dems.
Good idea. One of the reasons I don’t watch network news is I can’t stand the sight of those pompous jerks.
oh I see.. now I’m supposed to believe polls and surveys?
I think Americans by an overwhelming majority trust MSM. Sad but true.
From here on out, I don’t read or listen to polls.
Nate Silver, maybe, at least I’ll know the truth, as bad as it might be.
This is why the media has switched to grand silence on sensitive issues like “Benghazi” and “Fast and Furious.”
Aside from sources like FR> We have fewer places that make proclamations, and we have to do a lot more work digging to find information.
Silence has been the Media’s new weapon of choice.
This poll will make absolutely no difference. We're working with folks who have been dumbed down for years.
The liberal networks understand only one thing: money. And money comes from ratings. And ratings come from viewers. And the dumbed down viewers will watch the liberal networks because they don't know any better.
curiosity poses a question
the survey found a skepticism of the media was HIGHEST among younger voters 18-34
the “stay-at-homes” was a hell of a lot higher for Obama than it was for the GOP, even though he managed to keep blue state majorities, just smaller ones
could a big percentage of those missing voters be among the youth who voted for Obama last time?????
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.