CONTACT Cable News - Request they Televise Candidate Events in Full - Contact info provided

[NattPang]

Could this be a project for the New Activist Corp here at DU?

I didn't used to watch Cable News,
until I became interested in these elections.

I have noticed a pattern emerging in the news reporting.
when there is some negative occurrence to report about McCain,
the media immediately finds something equally as bad or worse to report about Obama.

I call it "The Media's Equalizing Situation Strategy", aka, The MESS.

Often, the Barack Obama gaffes are not gaffes at all,
but are reported as if there were.

This past week, John McCain made so many mistakes and gaffes,
we needed score keepers just to keep track.
Here's one list:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x6491012

and another: http://www.motherjones.com/mojoblog/archives/2008/07/8973_john_mccain_bad_week.html

But what was covered by the cable news much more than:
McCain's inane statement on Social Security;
his ridiculous promise to cut the deficit in 4 or 8 years;
his lies on veteran organization endorsements;
his non vote on FISA;
his attacks on Obama's non-vote on a bill that McCain also didn't vote for;
his adviser, Dr. Phil's statement that we are a nation of whiners;
his denial by stating that Dr. Phil wasn't speaking for him when he was;
his incorrect spanish language television ad,
his lies about his POW story and the Pittsburgh Steelers,
or revelations of the circumstances surrounding how McCain left his first wife,
etc...(yes, there were more),

was Jesse Jackson's comments that he wants to get at Obama's nuts
for talking down to Black people,

the (sound-byte) report
that Obama wants all American children to learn Spanish

the so-called gaffe
that Obama forgot to beg timely for Hillary donations,

The gross joke by a comedian at an Obama function,

and Michelle's out-of-context comment about earrings and the tax rebate.

So by the end of the week, accordingly,
Obama didn't look any better
than McCain for the wear.

Anyone looking can see this treatment of the candidates.

What we have to figure out is
how we are going to call the media out on The MESS?

At DU, we energetically discuss holding our politicians accountable,
but we often resign ourselves to acceptance, helplessness, and/or near apathy,
when it comes to taking action against the media for their tactics.
We sit by the sideline and mention the media's culpability,
read Media Matters, or watch You Tube Videos,
but we rarely activate to really try to 'do' something.

Maybe if we strategize, we can make our voices as strong over media coverage,
as we have for the past 21 days on the FISA vote.

Is it possible that we could begin by demanding that
Cable News televise candidate events in full?

If voters got to see candidate events on television,
they'd be more able to form their own opinions.

This is a bipartisan request that is reasonable by most standards,
and something the Cable News did consistently during the primaries.
But since Obama has become the nominee,
such coverage has virtually disappeared.

If the media can dedicate 9 days of broadcast on the life and death of a colleague,
perhaps there is a way that they could find the will to provide voters with needed information
for the very important upcoming election; by letting the candidates speak for themselves.

Thousands of requests made by activists and sent to cable media on a daily basis
might persuade them to consider it.

CONTACT INFORMATION BELOW

CNN: http://www.cnn.com/feedback/cnntv/
(see bottom of the page to contact individual news commentators)

Morning Joe:
LOOK FOR THIS BOX DOWN THE PAGE: Do you have a question or comment for Joe Scarborough and the Morning Joe team? Send it to us and we may respond to you on the show.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036789/

Chris Matthews: [e-mail]

Keith Olbermann: [e-mail]

David Gregory of Race of the White House:
LOOK FOR THIS BOX DOWN THE PAGE: Do you have a question or comment on the 2008 presidential race for the White House?
Email the show or call 212-790-2299.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23580538/

Dan Abram of Verdict:
LOOK FOR THIS BOX DOWN THE PAGE: Got a tip for our "Beat the Press" segment? Send us a link or tell us where you saw the show.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19599749/

FOX News:
list of all anchors here:
http://www.congress.org/congressorg/dbq/media/?command=org_pages&org_id=555

Fox News Sunday with Chris Wallace
E-mail: [e-mail]
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]

[calimary]

1. Gotta kick this one!

SKY HIGH!

EXCELLENT!

And it's exactly what we should be doing. They ARE aware of it. Even the late Tim Russert commented on this, during one panel discussion about why mcsame always tends to get a free pass. He was talking about the perception of pro-mcsame bias with a bit of guilt in his demeanor and said "hey, we see the emails."

Maybe they all need to see a few more. A few THOUSAND more.

NEVER EVER hesitate to send one. Whether you think it makes any difference or not. WEIGH IN ANYWAY. Via email or snail mail or phone calls or faxes or whatever.

[NattPang]

2. Plus, I'm not asking that we write accusing them of any wrongdoing,

only to write and insist that they cover both candidates' campaign events in full,
like they did during the primaries.

If viewers get to see and hear the candidates,
they can decided what's what.
There is no need for the media to interpret everything,
including what we never saw or heard.

That is why I am promoting this action, because as you say,
they see the emails.

I know that many believe that it is useless,
but I disagree.

If we can ride on the FISA vote for a straight 21 days,
I'm not sure why we can't "try" to affect change
with what the media will televise.

We have to make the attempt,
otherwise, they win.

[ElizaF]

3. Cable Networks

I agree wholeheartedly with this sentiment; I wonder, however, if it would also be a good idea to have a general framework of a message which could be sent to all of these shows/networks at the same time, so that they might at least understand that more than one or two "malcontents" are noticing this ongoing bias. (I had never had the time until I retired to see many of these afternoon/early evening shows, and I have been astounded at the bias, lack of research, and downright sloppy reporting.) Knowing that it is still MSM, I have lately gotten into the habit of looking first to see what corporation owns it, and then I can fill in the blanks of the bias myself (saves time), but I would really enjoy seeing more of the candidates and the events themselves, before having to endure the spin.

[NattPang]

4. Welcome!

It is much easier to recognize the spin,
if one has seen the actual event,
which may be why the media has stopped
televising them.

That is why that's all I am asking of them
for now.

I think if they got a few thousand letters,
they would be forced to consider it.

Plus, if the progressive blogs made it a project,
it may be an offer that the cables can't refuse.

It isn't like they are showing anything worth not missing
to begin with.

[calimary]

6. Hey! Welcome to DU, ElizaF!

A framework is good, but an individualized message is better. Otherwise it looks like astroturf or something generated by mass-emailing machinery.

It's really galling, though, isn't it - how slopping the "journalism" is anymore? I suspect some of the "practitioners" feel they're being objective by simply regurgitating what they hear - mainly from the VIPs to whom they covet that precious ACCESS, and not asking follow-ups or getting a second opinion or fact-checking (or better yet, AGENDA-checking) before they run with it. "I'm being objective. I'm just here to relay what they said." Yeah. Just laziness, really. And probably, more than a few of our present-day "journalists" got a communications degree so they know how to behave on camera, but they're in over their heads in having any significant grasp of what they're reporting. Hey, got a deadline. Need a quick-'n'-dirty. Wham, bam, thank you ma'am. Next?

DISGRACEFUL. And that's what's helping too many voters form their opinions on the issues and candidates. Sigh...

BTW - thought you'd like to see this:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x6494398

[NattPang]

5. I sent a "story idea" to CNN

I wrote:
I would like for CNN to televise the Presidential candidates campaign events live, with almost no interruption from commentators.

How can voters make up their minds if we aren't allowed to see the campaign events, but only hear from news commentators? It is not enough to see video footage of the presidential candidates mouthing words while anchors talk over them. Selective short outakes does not provide the kind of insight that voters, most who are quite bright, could gather themselves by watching the candidates state their own case. Also, round table discussion from News reporters are boring. They have no expertise on most of the issues important to voters, and the "candidate Gotcha Gaffe Clinton this...Jesse Jackson" trivializes the entire election.

Programming the campaign events live (like you did more of during the primaries) would increase viewership and you would be rendering a public service to the electorate. I watch events on CNNlive, but many voters don't have access to the Internet, so it is not the same thing. CNN would be informing many, and could then merit the title "Best Political Team on Television", a title that it has bestowed itself.

Thank you for your consideration

I emailed this message from their feedback site called "sent us story ideas":
http://www.cnn.com/feedback/forms/form11b.html?2

[merh]

7. Anyone have Rachel Maddow's email?

thanks in advance