I'm changing my avatar to Sharpton.

[Myra]

The media is pretending three candidates are invisible:
Sharpton, Mosley Braun and Kucinich.

But I can only use one avatar at a time.

[Megrim]

1. The media is ignoring those three because

none of them as even the remotest chance at winning the nomination.

[Joe the Revelator]

2. Thats not up to the media to decide

Let there be a couple of votes cast before the media starts to play king maker

[Iverson]

6. exactly (n/t)

(n/t)

[mmonk]

10. correct

We can't let them decide who is viable and who is not.

[Cheswick2.0]

3. who gives a shit what the media thinks?

They don't get to decide who has a remote chance and who does not. Several national polls have shown Edwards and Kerry polling only a few points above the three we are talking about. Maybe the media should stop covering them too? Clarks numbers aren't to good lately either.
We can't cut them out though because they are the DLC approved white guys. The only reason they haven't cut Dean out of the news is because he is doing so well.

[AP]

8. I've been thinking about this: I think that at this stage the media sort

of has an obligation to present each candidate in a light most favorable to the candidate. They have on obligation to let us know each candidate's ideas so that we can make an informed decision.

They don't do that. I'll grant that there are moments when they do that. Edwards does get occasional honest media, like the GQ article. Sharpton was on the Daily Show over a year ago, and Stewart did that form him. Kucinich RARELY gets that sort of coverage.

Think about what the media does for Bush. He doesn't just get exposure in the most favorable light, he get's exposure in a light that doesn't even exist in reality.

I'm not saying the media shouldn't show us the warts. But the warts they show us now are basically warts they create. How can you knock a candidate for being unlikely to win when all you do is knock them so that nobody knows them.

There's a bias towards size and wealth in America, and treating a candidate like Kucinich as if he's too small to get noticed without bothering to notice him first is part of systemic bias in favor of politicians who totally sell out, or who are friendly enough to business and people with money so that they're rewarded by the press.

Know what I mean?

[spooky3]

9. good points, AP.

[Cheswick2.0]

4. Myra you can use all three

just copy the urls from other peoples posts and enter them all in your sig line rather than the avatar space.

[jpgpenn]

5. Well you are finally getting it

You failed to see all of that the last ,Ohhh, 4 months? The media is in direct partnership with the White House and GOP. You have had a virtual blackballing of all candidates but Dean. You have had Dean in the news daily going back into the summer. If he said or did anything poorly it was brushed over and talking points were made about something a lil more postive. On the other hand, whenever 1 of the other candidates said or did anything postive a good many times it wasn't even announced.

There are so many reports of republicans helping fund Dean's campaign, NO questions being raised about Dean's past history as governor etc. Don't be fooled all the way though. These issues will soon be addressed about Dean. They will be addressed as soon as the GOP and Media know they have done their job and Dean gets the nomination. When that happens wait in see how quick they are going to crush this guy they have built up.

[JNelson6563]

7. you're delusional

The right has been ganging up on Dean as much as the left.

But I suppose you are drinking that yucky sour-grape whine so I understand how your perception may be skewed. ;-)

Julie