Reuters: 'Media Bias Largely Unseen in Presidential Race'

NewsBusters ^ | 11.09.08 | Brent Baker

[rvoitier]

Barely two weeks after a Pew Research Center for the People and the Press survey determined that “by a margin of 70%-9%, Americans say most journalists want to see Obama, not John McCain, win on Nov. 4,” as even 62 percent of Democrats recognized how journalists hoped Obama would be victorious, Reuters set out to prove any and all favorable Obama coverage had nothing to do with liberal bias. In a November 6 dispatch, “Media bias largely unseen in U.S. presidential race,” Steve Gorman of the Los Angeles bureau focused his story on undermining the “perception that mainstream news organizations routinely gave Obama preferential treatment en route to his election as the first black U.S. president.”

[rvoitier]

Oh Brother
Story here

[HobonicsNRA]

The media can’t stand to see white people in positions in power. They knew they would get better ratings if a muslim won so they tried to get Obama elected.

[The_Reader_David]

As I pointed out before, the wallpaper is largely unseen, but it’s there all around you.

[saga]

Give me FU@&ing Break..................

[joma89]

If you tell a lie enough times, it becomes the truth. This is the liberal’s mantra and they know it works.

JoMa

[Red Steel]

These clowns can’t believe their BS.

[freedumb2003]

Reuters secures its place as having the same credibility as The Onion.

Or a bit less.

[Yaelle]

"Media Bias Largely Unseen In Presidential Race" by the media and all of their readers and viewers completely bamboozled by the unseen bias.

[RichInOC]

And now you know it’s not a coincidence that Barney bit the Reuters hack. Barney is a smart dog.

[concerned about politics]

Give me a break. We know more about Joe the Plumber than we do about Barrack Oboma! Joe wasn't even running for office!

[Yaelle]

Members of the Mainstream Media, please raise your hands if you told your viewers that part of your anatomy tingled when John McCain spoke.

No one? Bueller??

I rest my case.

[CodeMasterPhilzar]

Media bias largely unseen in U.S. presidential race,

BWAAAHHH HAAA HAA!

That's a funny one. Maybe if you're Al-Qaeda hiding in a cave in Afghanistan...

Unseen? Not only was the pro-Obama media bias seen, it was felt, tasted, touched, smelled, and rammed down our throats. This {expletive} clown can push this drivel all he wants, no-one with half a brain is buying it.

[realcleanguy]

Wow, just wow, reuters just lost all my respect and support. They are in the tank with Obama

[sageb1]

If I didn’t have such standards, I’d release the 20 some-odd emails I exchanged with one of the editors of my local paper. He said that because I was biased, I couldn’t point out their bias. And yes, there was an agenda. Over a year ago, my paper printed a little public info “extra,” which stated that they were joining with other newspapers to affect change. Conspiracy? Darned straight there was a conspiracy.

[highlander_UW]

In a November 6 dispatch, “Media bias largely unseen in U.S. presidential race,” Steve Gorman of the Los Angeles bureau focused his story on undermining the “perception that mainstream news organizations routinely gave Obama preferential treatment en route to his election as the first black U.S. president.”

Time for this guy's employer to put him on a random drug testing program.

[hawkeye101]

[concerned about politics]

of the Los Angeles bureau

Los Angels? Nope. No biased reporting there - NOT!!

(This guy is a HUGE environmentalist.)

[Question_Assumptions]

It’s like the media is entering the final phases of one of those degenerative mental disorders where the victim eventually loses all touch with reality.

[anniegetyourgun]

It apparently was “unseen” by the deluded masses who put this guy in power.

[Kevmo]

Is there some way to measure media bias? I hope so. Because I think Intrade would be interested in posting contracts on it if it were measurable.