It's neat that the Chicago Tribune put out a voter's guide like this to compare and contrast candidates. Before you watch this, guess which two candidates do not have specially added American flags flying throughout there entire videos?
The more I think about it, the more I start to realize that folks in the media are as ignorant of Ron Paul as some people I encounter. The difference is, the folks I encounter I get to ask "Well, how does that candidate address the issues that are important to you?" The folks in the media probably don't get asked that by anyone, and when I encounter them and ask that, they say "Well, I do not lean toward any candidate, I am impartial." Some of the news coverage on Ron Paul would suggest a lack of critical reading of the coverage prior to it being released.
Before coming here, I was prepared for something that whiny Ron Paul supporters would refer to as a "media blackout." I was shocked by what I found. The man is really almost never mentioned in the media. NO ONE who has not been diligently following the elections has heard of the man.
Maybe there is no grand conspiracy to keep Ron Paul out of the media. Maybe there is no pressure from editors to keep Ron Paul out of the media. Maybe our highly trained and experienced journalists are just all too impartial to have their own viewpoints and are just too stupid to be able to reduce the man to anything, but meaningless soundbites when they do cover him.
I'm not quite sure what the story is.
Lew Rockwell posts the following:
A famous journalist (and wonderful writer) for a famous print publication calls a friend to say that "You would not believe the pressure all across the media not to write about Ron Paul, unless it is something quirky. I am ashamed to say my own editor is part of the blackout."
Reddit • Digg this • Stumble It • Shout It • Share on Facebook • Save to del.icio.us • Discuss on Newsvine
I wish you all a good day. - Allan