On anti-Clinton media bias in St P'burg Times -nothing new to us, of course, BUT -

[libbygurl]

...I was astounded to read one poster's comment - about the writer's claim the piece had a 'simplistic analysis' - as if Clinton was the one who brought all this media hate upon herself. I don't know this poster, haven't seen the name much anywhere (certainly not among the O mobs), but he/she seems to have totally missed McCamy Taylor's complete compendium of anti-Hillary media hit pieces and attacks - so I dutifully steered him/her in that direction.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=103&topic_id=343990&mesg_id=343990

============== post reproduced below ==============

Algorem (1000+ posts) Sun Mar-09-08 08:37 AM
Original message
Media tainted by anti-Clinton bias

http://www.sptimes.com/2008/03/09/Opinion/Media_tainted...

By Bill Maxwell, Times Columnist
Published March 9, 2008
ADVERTISEMENT
Latest Video

For a brief period last week, earnest members of my chosen profession, the press, did a little soul-searching and asked if we have been, and are, biased against Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Hillary Clinton.

The conclusion: Of course we are. Any journalist who denies this fact is unable to recognize objectivity if it were branded on his eyeballs.

I am not referring to opinion writers, who are expected to bring their personal perspectives and slants to issues and events. I am talking about editors and reporters charged with delivering a product the public can trust as truth and fairness. (For the record, though, most pundits, conservatives and liberals, also show bias against Clinton.)

If Clinton had not raised the issue and if Saturday Night Live had not spoofed journalists for fawning over Sen. Barack Obama, like puppies licking their owners' mouths, the charge of bias probably would have remained a mere wink-and-nod charade...

=============================

[zabet]

1. My reply to 'simplistic'...

"How simplistic is it that
Hillary has been attacked for
many many years by the media and
yet, she has weathered it all.

Like libbygurl said, read McCamy Taylor's
posts in the journal, 3 parts about the
long term blatant media bias against
Clinton. Lots of links and verification.
Possibly one of the most well put together
summaries of this issue I have ever seen.

She comes off as anything but frosty, we
have seen more glimpses of the personal,
real Hillary over the career politician
facade she normally maintains (for self
preservation) this election."
-------------------

:hi:

[libbygurl]

2. Good morning to you! Thanks so much for doing that.

As always, you expressed it more eloquently and succintly than I ever could. At least that poster was really a decent sort - acknowledged the suggestions I gave and did not go into rabid attack mode on my answer unlike those others in that roving pack of wolves who support BO. I was just very surprised at that very narrow perspective on HRC and the press!

Hopefully the poster will be persuaded into supporting HRC, too! Thanks much, c_j!

:hi:

[zabet]

3. Anytime!

I agree the poster
seemed very receptive
to different points of
view. If the poster does
indeed read the Series by
McCamy, they will have a
whole different perspective.
And that will be a good thing.

:)