Posted on 11/10/2008 5:56:47 AM PST by tobyhill
The mainstream press have been accused of being biased in favor of President-elect Barack Obama for months - a phenomenon now acknowledged by one of the nation's media heavyweights.
On Sunday, The Washington Post's ombudsman, Deborah Howell, offered evidence of an "Obama tilt" in her own newspaper.
"Readers have been consistently critical of the lack of probing issues coverage and what they saw as a tilt toward Democrat Barack Obama. My surveys, which ended on Election Day, show that they are right on both counts," Ms. Howell wrote in her column.
"Now Howell gives the mea culpa in her first column after Election Day, when it's far too late to do anything about it. Where was Howell during the last three months? Why wait until the election is over to speak up? That's an answer in itself," countered Ed Morrissey of Hot Air.
"Now she tells us," quipped Byron York of National Review.
Revelations of a pro-Obama press are not new.
A Pew Research Center survey released in late October found, for example, that 70 percent of voters agreed that the press wanted Mr. Obama to win the White House; the figure was 62 percent even among Democratic respondents. The same analysis found a Democrat-friendly press dating back to the 1992 presidential election.
A current Harvard University analysis revealed that 77 percent of Americans say the press in politically biased; of that group, 5 percent said it skewed conservative.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
Washington Post: “Yeah, we were biased! What are you gonna do about it?”
The answer is, “Absolutely nothing”.
All credibility is lost. There's no way to be trusted once a newspaper or a person breaks a trust.
Anything negative wound up on the floor.
As for the "Anal yists"....
“A day late and a dollar short” as they say. It doesn’t matter - the willing accomplises did their job and got “the messiah” elected. That’s all that counts.
Mathematical chances that this discovery will have ANY impact on the way the Washington Post will report in the future?
ZERO ! ! !
Dear Washington Post,
You f’ed the nation over, now go f’ yourself.
Cordially,
America
If you already know what they are going to write, why bother reading it?
for all of those on this forum that believe the “dinosaur media” is dying,
they just help elect a socialist president.
si.
My wife insists on watching NBC news with Brian Williams. Every one of his reports during the election cycle should have ended with “I’m Barack Obama, and I approved this message.”
So when his illegal campaign contributions and rezco connections come out what will that say? “Ooops - are our faces red!”
Will they do a Whitewater-style Clintoon coverup?
Are they too stupid they cannot see the folly in their overlooking these things? Woul you trust a criminal next door to your house? IF not then why trust him in the White House - like they did with the former Rapist-In-Chief?
The dinosaur media will only die if there is not a “fairness doctrine”.
Once the fairness doctrine and “internet neutrality” is instituted, it will stifle any and all opposition. FR will be gone.
Which is exactly why they wanted Obamugabe elected. They are trying to prevent their own extinction.
are we going quietly?
Scary stuff showing how the goal was the step by step brainwashing of the American people. Thanks for posting.
Sorry, you’ll have to get back from the Washington Post.
I think that by admitting bias did they not just expose themselves to lawsuit? Think people, there has to be someway to sue when a media outlet shows bias. If someone were to sue and win then it would open up all of them to current and future lawsuits. They would either have to pay up or change their status and lose the protections offered to “journalists”.
If some individual claimed that the distortion of the WaPo caused them to vote for O and that they now see that they were duped by what was supposed to be a representative media outlet?
Any lawyers out there? I think that since the media has some protections in the constitution that they also have some responsibilities to present information in an unbiased format.
Maybe not, but it just seems like there would be something there to sue over...
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.