Why has the corporate media always gone so easy on Bush?

[raccoon]

Suppose Clinton could have been, and was, re-elected in 2000. Suppose that everything else happened since then pretty much as it has in real life.

The corporate media would’ve dragged Clinton over the coals for 9/11 happening and for lying all over the place to invade Iraq.

Everybody in the US would know who Jeff Gannon was and you’d have heard jokes about him on the local radio stations and in RL.

I know it’s really big business that runs the country, and big business makes contributions to politicians of both parties. But why such a double standard?

I wonder if at some point Clinton did/didn’t do something that really ticked off the power elite, and that’s when the corporate media jumped on him.

[Justyce]

1. There's no such thing

as integrity in journalism anymore (in the mainstream media at least, or very rarely) -- it's all about money, and Bush makes them lots of money & cuts taxes for the ultra-rich & corporations... Clinton didn't help out the rich & corporations enough to buy their silence. In my opinion, it really has nothing to do with "news" anymore.

[rurallib]

2. Let me add that the so-called 'liberal' NPR falls in here also

Their news and analysis has deteriorated badly under Bush. Have no doubt that balls are being squeezed at NPR and PBS behind the scenes.

[candice]

10. That's why I listen to Air America now instead of NPR

...having that slimy David Brooks (NYT) run commentary on the Democratic Convention was the final straw. They even make Terry Gross interview neanderthals for a "fair and balanced" news. As if the mouthpieces of the White House were fair and balanced. The so-called "liberal" NYT has to bear responsibility for beating the false war drums against Iraq. Who cares if Jason Blair? made up a few news stories. Promoting a false war has costs hundreds of thousands of innocent lives. SHAME!

[zbdent]

3. You're forgetting one aspect of the 2000 election -

(and it would have been Gore, anyway).

The Rabid (armed) Right was so worked into a frenzy with the media's backing that this country would have been embroiled in a civil war had Bush not been installed as the "president".

[raccoon]

6. I said "Suppose Clinton could have been, and was, re-elected in 2000. "

[zbdent]

7. I saw that, yet I still say that the Repukes would have started a civil

war.

Although nothing about their tactics is "civil".

[raccoon]

14. Yep, not much civility about them.

And yet they claim to promote "family values."

Wasn't it Humpty Dumpty who said, "when I use a word, it means what I want it to mean?"

[johnaries]

4. You answered your own question in your header.

CORPORATE media....

[Frances]

5. The corporate media is the corporate media

They crucified Clinton because he empowered the little guy (he was a little guy who climbed the ladder of success using his own brain power).

It's ironic because Clinton is no radical--he was just prepared to turn the government over to the corporations totally. Bush/Cheney and the corporations are one and the same.

Dwight David Eisenhower would say that he warned us.

[bearfan454]

8. All the news stations are owned by corporations.

Corporations are all repuke owned.

[0007]

9. Look at who owns each network. Aren't they all in bed with

junior? So how could a journalist keep a job if he/she were negative toward the little two foot king?

'Tis plain to see it is a one way street. "Double standard" is just a word that the right wing like to use.

Look at Clinton's poll numbers when the shit was coming down on him compared to junior and his numbers. That should be the tip off!

[rman]

11. Because Bush is a corporate guy,

more so then Clinton.

Why the double standard? They are not honest people.

What Clinton did to tick of the power elite, is to get elected.

[Syncronaut Seven]

12. Just like Iran in 1980, The bushes made them a better offer.

Or perhaps an offer they couldn't refuse (read anthrax)

[CBHagman]

13. When Michael Barone screamed that Gore tried to "steal"

...the election of 2000, I knew we weren't in Kansas anymore. That Gore could win the popular vote and that Bush could push, with the assistance of his own brother, no less, to have the vote counting ENDED, without massive outcry in the media, showed how skewed the coverage was getting. Worse still, when the media consortium did a study of the 2000 ballots and revealed that depending on what criteria were used for counting ballots, either Gore or Bush could have been declared the winner, many media outlets published the story under a variation of the headline "Bush would have won anyway." Only those of us who read the book "The Press Effect" or fleshed-out articles on the election learned the truth.

[GreenPartyVoter]

15. Corporations now own the media and the gov't. ** is the CEO in chief