I don't recall heavy media coverage on anything dealing with the Democratic Party in 2001.

[FrenchieCat]

So why is there such expansive coverage of the GOP Tantrum gathering on the Cable Chatter Channels?

Heck, I even remember marching in rallies against the war, and got so little reported on it,
it made my blood boil.

What the disparity? What am I missing? :shrug:

[firedupdem]

1. I find it disgusting. CNN is shit. n/t

[Tumbulu]

2. The conservative corporate media will not give up easily

they want their control back.

[sufrommich]

3. Good question. It's time to call them on it. Rush the

hate monger should NOT get prime time coverage from supposedly legitimate news sources. If enough Democrats would complain,they will take notice. Please email CNN and voice your displeasure.

[FrenchieCat]

4. I agree, and have already done so....

I called them as well.

Phone Numbers:

CNN-

(404) 827 – 1500
Comment line: (404) 827 - 0234
(From grasswire
fax: [phone].
CNN NEWS DIRECTOR Kim Bondy. 404 827 1500. fax. [phone]
CNN NEWSROOM 404.827.1500 . 404.827.1500. [e-mail]
Call Anderson Cooper at 1-866-NY-AC360

Everyone at CNN is listed individually on this page: http://www.cnn.com/feedback/cnntv /

[sufrommich]

10. Called and e-mailed. hope everybody reading this

does the same. It's easy and if you don't want to wait to speak to a live person you can leave a voice mail.

[w4rma]

5. No Ownership. No Fairness Doctrine. (nt)

[villager]

6. You're not missing a damn thing. You are seeing things plainly for what they are.

n/t

[Nite Owl]

7. Actually this is a good thing

it absolutely validates that the nutjobs are in charge of the GOP. This is their face and ol' Limpballs is their leader. They can't deny it now.

[Cha]

8. Corporatemediawhores have a problem with

reporting facts..they really only excel at pumping up deflated poop brains AKA gop.

Here's my fave quote of the week from our DUer..

Beetwasher (1000+ posts) Thu Feb-26-09 02:39 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. I'm Telling You, Obama Will Be The Death Of Traditional Media
The bigger the disconnect, the more people will tune out. They will either change, or fail. Obama is going around, under and through them, bringing his message directly to the people.

I wholeheartedly see his reasoning!

[GentryDixon]

9. Why don't we pool our resources?

We can then take out an ad in the NYT (perhaps) and call these media whores for what they are. In a nice way, of course, but certainly trying to make them embarrassed for their RW slant.

With all the talent on this site, I am sure someone can come up with a concise ad to get our point across.

Emailing the networks is like pissing in the wind.

I am willing to put up the first $100.00. :bounce:

[karynnj]

11. Even last year - how much coverage was there of Take Back America

Which though far more civil, intellectual and sane - might be the closest parallel I can think of.

[jefferson_dem]

12. Good, I say.

Let the world see and hear the irrational vitriol spewed by Limpballs and his minions...

Broadcast this shit far and wide.

[emulatorloo]

13. I don't think Democrats were allowed near cameras or microphones

Actually I still don't think they are permitted to get near them now either.

[FrenchieCat]

14. That's what I concluded.

[tigereye]

15. people love a train wreck?

[City Lights]

16. The "liberal" media can't get enough of conservatism.

:puke:

I'm so sick of all of it that I rarely tune in anymore.

The squeaky wheel gets the oil, and no one squeaks like conservatives. They're in a perpetual state of squeak. Screw 'em.

[dcindian]

17. CNN needs to explain the news worthiness

Of course they cannot. They are just giving free air time to their owners the right.

[neverforget]

18. I remember Gary Condit (D-CA) in wall to wall coverage about Chandra Levy.

That was your "Democratic Party" coverage of 2001.

[Peace Patriot]

20. Yup, that was about it.

But even that was the wrong coverage. They should have been covering Cheney, and asking him questions about his meeting with Condit during the very day on which Levy disappeared, and during the very hours of her disappearance (as later revised by the DC police/FBI Lab). But they never asked Cheney a single thing--not even to verify that the meeting took place. (It did--Cheney aides told Newsweek three months later). Nor did the DC police or FBI ask. I think there's something there. I've been smelling a rat on that one for eight years.

Now they've suddenly come up with suspect. Did you catch that the other day? Eight frigging years later they're going to fry some poor peasant from El Salvador for it.

Really, I smell a big rat.

[neverforget]

24. Ah summer 2001.....shark attacks, Chandra Levy, memos titled "Bin Laden

determined to strike in US", Cheneys energy task force.... nothing going on that summer stupid fucking media

[Vinca]

19. Limpballs has gotten more coverage than John Edwards did when

he was the VP candidate. Seriously.

[onenote]

21. I remember a fair amount of coverage being given to Mcauliffe's selection as DNC Chair in 2001

Apart from that, I don't recall the Democrats getting much attention, but then again, I don't recall that they were doing much to gain attention. The country was prosperous and not at war. Indeed, between inauguration day and the end of Feb 2001, the Senate considered 14 bills and nominations and with only a couple of exceptions, they approved them with no (that's right -- zero - dissenting votes). In contrast, we now are in the midst of two wars, an economic crisis, and the need to repair the virtually unlimited damage wrought by eight years of chimpy's presidency. Not surprisingly, the issues being discussed are more complicated and more controversial. In the amount of time in which the Senate voted fourteen times in 2001, the Senate has voted 73 times in 2009.

[blm]

22. You didn't see most of Kerry's key speeches during 2004 campaign, either. Limbaugh got

news network coverage for his CPAC speech to the same-old wingnuts that Kerry couldn't get for his speech to FIREFIGHTERS. News networks REFUSED to broadcast Democratic NOMINEE John Kerry's speech because it challenged Bush to debate instead of hiding behind the Swiftliars - yet Limbaugh, a fucking TALKRADIO HOST, can attack a Democratic President all he wants with news network cameras rolling LIVE.

[Tarheel_Dem]

23. Because we don't make a big enough stink about media bias. Almost

every other rightwing pundit, or guest on any news show takes a gratuitous swipe at the "liberal media bias", and it apparently works. Hell, they have think tanks to come up with strategies to condemn the M$M. One of the few times that I listened to Nancy Skinner, she made a statement about news shows booking 2 rightwing guests for every liberal booked.

I know the idea of a Fairness Doctrine is now destroyed forever, but someone with guts has to go after legislation that will break up the monopolies that exist in media. Let's not become overconfident just because we have a popular president, the GOP and it's allies in the media are making every effort to destroy a good man, and a progressive agenda.

[Kat45]

25. I was just thinking the same thing.

On the cable channels, on network news, the reports always feature someone with an 'R' after his or her name ranting about how wrong anything Obama said/did is. For the last eight years, when virtually everything bush said/did was wrong, I cannot remember them showing even one person saying anything against it. This is pissing me off and is more proof that the so-called liberal media is quite conservative, as in right-wing.

[iamthebandfanman]

26. its what they are best at

being whiney cry babies who stomp and scream until someone takes notice of them.
i mean, if this whole thing were reversed , wed be getting called obstructionists and unpatriotic for acting the way they are.

its sad.

[Clio the Leo]

27. schadenfreude = good tv! NT

[sampsonblk]

28. Because the GOP has an organized campaign to get out their organized points

We had a dozen people/groups putting out a dozen points, none of which were congruent.

Even today, we have more wings to our party than an army of chickens. On most issues, those guys are a monolith. And they hold firm - extremely firm - on the points where they all agree. Our party does not.