Here's proof the media turned on Dean

[Ugnmoose]

http://www.joplinindependent.com/display_article.php/c-jensen1075581263

<snip>
Meanwhile, the Center for Media and Public Affairs (CMPA), a nonpartisan, nonprofit research organization in Washington, D.C., which conducts scientific studies of the news media, was monitoring the nightly network news broadcasts that are the source of news and information for most Americans. The results of the CMPA study, released January 15, 2004, revealed that Gov. Dean received significantly more negative criticism on the network broadcasts while his Democratic presidential competitors received significantly more positive comments. The research examined 187 stories broadcast on the ABC, CBS, and NBC evening news in 2003. Only 49 percent of all on-air evaluations of Gov. Dean in 2003 were positive while the other Democratic contenders received 78 percent favorable coverage.


In a follow-up study by CMPA, of the network coverage of the candidates from January 1 to January 18, the night before the Iowa caucuses, revealed that the networks selected Kerry and Senator John Edwards before the Iowa voters did. As you may recall, Kerry finished first with 38% of the vote; Edwards ranked second just below Kerry with 32%; and Dean managed only a poor third with 18% of the vote. During the two-and-a-half week period leading up to the Iowa caucuses, there had not been a single negative word uttered about Edwards by the three networks (100% favorable coverage) while nearly all, 96% of the comments about Kerry were positive. However, Gov. Dean's coverage during those first 18 days of January was significantly less glowing with 42% unfavorable on-air evaluations.

[slinkerwink]

1. shhh, don't tell them the truth----we'll be branded as crybabies

;-)

[blm]

10. shhh, don't tell them this is a Scaife-funded group

who wants the Dem party destroyed by making Dean supporters feel more aggrieved and angry with the party.

Note that there are NO DETAILS on the stories and actually groups ALL the other candidates together to make their bogus case.

[dsc]

17. I would like a link

[blm]

19. From the archives, dsc....you don't remember this from a few weeks ago?

Just who is the CMPA anyway?

http://www.cmpa.com/index.htm


A little bit about their funding:
http://www.mediatransparency.org/search_results/info_on_any_recipient.php?573

Note "The Sarah Scaife Foundation" grants. Is that...?

[dsc]

22. I will igive you this one

but since I have been told by many posters, including you when you quoted the Weekly Standard, to argue the issue and not the person, do you have proof this study is wrong?

[blm]

26. You call that a study? They lumped the other candidates together

to make a case and you call that a study? That alone should have clued you in.

[dsc]

29. I take it your computer editted this out

In a follow-up study by CMPA, of the network coverage of the candidates from January 1 to January 18, the night before the Iowa caucuses, revealed that the networks selected Kerry and Senator John Edwards before the Iowa voters did. As you may recall, Kerry finished first with 38% of the vote; Edwards ranked second just below Kerry with 32%; and Dean managed only a poor third with 18% of the vote. During the two-and-a-half week period leading up to the Iowa caucuses, there had not been a single negative word uttered about Edwards by the three networks (100% favorable coverage) while nearly all, 96% of the comments about Kerry were positive. However, Gov. Dean's coverage during those first 18 days of January was significantly less glowing with 42% unfavorable on-air evaluations.


I know you wouldn't purposely ignore it. I hope it comes through on your computer this time. Note the 96% favorable coverage for Kerry before he won Iowa.

[Hep]

2. You must be misunderstanding SOMETHING

If it defends Dean in any way, it's bunk, and if it derides him, it's fair and true.

You must not have gotten the memo.

[displacedtexan]

3. Dean was the frontrunner; hence, the most negative coverage

Are you keeping tabs on the % of negative Kerry stories since Iowa?

[elb77]

13. I have been keeping track...

And let's see...there was the whole botox thing. That doesn't really count though, does it? In fact, that's all I can think of. Oh, no, there was ONE thing in the Washington Post about special interests. But seriously, that is the ONLY negative media coverage he has received. Please, tell me if I am wrong. Tell me if I have selective hearing. This in no way compares to the treatment Dean received. Even Kerry himself must realize that.

[newyawker99]

15. Hi elb77!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[George_Bonanza]

24. Why doesn't botox count?

It's been big enough for Dean to participate in it. I guess the Scream shouldn't count either, right?

[elb77]

28. I would not condone

any anti-Kerry sentiment Dean may show regarding Botox. That's just plain stupid. This differs from the scream in the sense that the scream was played 700 times in a couple days...and was used to insinuate that Dean is an "angry liberal", that he lost his temper...it was a shot at his character...not just an ET/Extra piece.

[stickdog]

16. Yes, we've been keeping track. And the media still relentlessly anti-Dean

and pro-Kerry & pro-Edwards.

Try again.

[Skip Intro]

4. And after Iowa, the "scream coverage" (look how angry this man is...)

The media attempted to assasinate Dean politically, although no amount of proof or documentaion will convince some.


I have never seen every tv news outlet act in such concert before. My question is, who's orders were they following?

[ProfessorPlum]

5. Look, of course the media turned on Dean

it's no less than we expected. My support for Dean is based on my perception that he has the ability to rise above being sandbagged by the media better than any other candidate. And I think he is largely bearing that out.

Who else in our field could have had the narrative he's had in the last couple of weeks?

Dean's a big boy - he can take care of himself. We, of course, have to fight to keep the media as fair as we can, but he'll never get a fair shake. You can't count on the media being fair if you plan to win.

[On the Road]

6. Absolutely -- and It Was Not Only the Count of Articles

that damaged Dean. It was unfounded character assassination by a bunch of amateur psychologists who should know better.

None of the media charges against the other candidates have been nearly as serious.

[einniv]

7. I thought it was sickening myself.

I've decided , from a financial perspective, to wait until a nominee is chosen before providing support. And my schedule is such that any campaigning will have to wait until then as well. So I don't really haev a stake in all of this but I thought it was a clear media assassination.
I like Dean. I liked what he was saying right after Gore decided not to run.
I also like Kerry. I wasn't thrilled with his "enabling". In fact, at the time I was quite pissed off but I have been able to forgive and forget. I find Kerry's record to my liking and feel he is someone that we can trust. So that he finds himself in the top position , I have no problem with.
But for those who refuse to see what was done to Dean well... I just don't get it. These same people don't have any problem seeing when the media whores for Bush... what gives? The media is now pro-Dem and to be trusted? I'm not saying they by themselves cause the loss. Or even that Dean would have won in Iowa and New hamp. if not for the media. Regardless of whether that is the case or not, the concerted attacks were very real.
Well at least we can gain some insight into why the Bush backers fail to see the pro-Bush bias in the media. They just really don't see it. Because they don't want to.

[DianeK]

8. it is certainly no surprise that the media would turn on dean...

it is in the media's best interest to have bush remain in the white house. bush is the best friend that big corporate business has ever known. dean is the one and only candidate who can legitimately beat bush because he is the only one who can debate the real achilles issues with bush. how can kerry debate no child left behind when he voted for it, how can kerry debate the war when he voted to turn his back on his constitutional responsibility and on and on and on......the onslaught we have seen against dean in the last 2 or 3 weeks has been a desperate, and perhaps successful, attempt to topple dean's chances..for me however, it is just further reason to support the one candidate who really will be able to help us win back our country

[CWebster]

14. So, in toppling Dean

are they setting up the candidate who would provide the least challenge to Bush?

[LuminousX]

9. Just remember

if we are relying upon the media to help get our guy elected, we are screwed. The media is like a raging river that we have to swim up while the GOP only have to float down.

We must always seek other avenues to reach the people.

[zulchzulu]

11. Another story shows proof as well

There seems to have been some secret shadow government Skull and Bones black helicopter agents who in fact were in Des Moines, Iowa the afternoon of the election. Someone had walked up behind Dean and slipped a small disc around the location of Dean's bad back that was able to monitor and remote control Dean's mannerisms and throat.

When he made the legendary scream in his non-concession speech that evening, his throat was controlled by agents hovering over the building in Skull and Bones black helicopters who used remote control technology to inject the behavior synapses that caused the scream.

These same helicopters had also mesmerized Iowans that were in caucuses that evening and forced them to vote against Dean.

[Melinda]

12. Indict the media, not the candiates:

Here's at least 30-50 thread topics alone:

http://www.cjr.org/blog/archives/cat_echo_chamber.asp
http://www.cjr.org/blog/archives/cat_spin_buster.asp
http://www.cjr.org/blog/archives/cat_distortion.asp
http://www.cjr.org/blog/archives/cat_cheap_shot.asp
http://www.cjr.org/blog/archives/cat_hidden_angle.asp
http://www.cjr.org/blog/archives/cat_newspapers.asp

[Emillereid]

18. The key lines in that piece

"What happened in the campaign that inspired the media to turn on Dean and throw their support to uninspiring Kerry? A clue may be found in a story published in the Washington Post on November 19, 2003. The Post reported: "In an interview Monday night , Dean unveiled his idea to 're-regulate' utilities, large media companies and businesses offering employee stock options. He also favors broad protections for workers including the right to unionize."

Also on November 19, the Associated Press reported, "Dean, the former Vermont governor, said Tuesday that if elected president, he would move to re-regulate business sectiors such as utilities and media companies to restore faith after corporate scandals such as Enron and WorldCom."

Dean's idea of re-regulating two out-of-control business sectors produced criticism from some of his competitors and surely struck a raw nerve within monopolistic utilities and mega-media companies. I believe Dean's progressive attack on monopolies helps explain why the corporate media started piling on Dean, portraying him with the pejorative term of the angry candidate. .

But while this helps explain why the media went after Dean, it doesn't explain why they suddenly anointed Kerry as their Golden Boy. However, it would appear that Kerry would not post a threat to corporate America while Dean would."

[farmbo]

20. Bingo!...Dean's media portrayal was sealed when he called for Re-reg...

...and told Tweety in December that he would consider breaking up the media empires.

After that he felt the full brunt of media "scrutiny".

[Emillereid]

21. Treating Kerry With Kid Gloves Can Only Boost Momentum -- check this out!

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/columns/brownstein/la-na-outlook2feb02,1,1918226.column?coll=la-home-utilities
February 2, 2004

CHARLESTON, S.C. — Has a frontrunner at the height of the race for a party's presidential nomination ever had an easier two weeks than John F. Kerry since the Iowa caucuses last month?

Since Iowa, three of the remaining major candidates in the race — Sens. John Edwards and Joe Lieberman and retired Army Gen. Wesley K. Clark — have chosen to raise virtually no argument against Kerry's possible nomination or even establish any sharp contrasts with him on issues.

The other remaining major candidate, fallen frontrunner Howard Dean, has tried to frame a case against Kerry, though in such a hyperbolic fashion that he has undercut his own effectiveness....

It's not just the media that are treating Kerry like the anointed one. Are the other candidates conceding the nomination to him?

[progressivebydesign]

23. People are annointing an unexamined candidate as the answer to our trouble

Hmmm... Don't get caught up in the electabilty trap. It IS a trap. Name recogntion and media free ride of a few weeks have given Kerry a boost... wait until the Rove machine gets done with him. Hopefully, we'll get a taste of that before the convention, or before any other candidates drop out. THEN we can see who really is electable against Bush. I hope all the candidates can stay in and have a chance. Then we can decide is Kerry is our best hope of beating Bush. Only then.. after he's been through what Dean has been through, can I judge his mettle.

[nolabels]

25. That seems to be the problem

Instead of willingness to serve the people that want elect them, they pander to every other interest but that one.

Stating you will be breaking their monopolies when placed in office, is tantamount to political suicide.

The multinational corporations have subdued the US government and it's elected officials to kow-tow to all and any of their whims.

[blm]

27. HAHAH...Kerry is the most examined Democrat other than Clinton.

The GOP has had operatives working against Kerry since the Nixon White House. They ramped it up even using the FBI to investigate him while Kerry was exposing BCCI and Iran Contra.

Kerry was Scaifed before Clinton.