TIME's Mark Halperin: 'Extreme Pro-Obama Media Bias A Disgusting Failure'

Politico:

Media bias was more intense in the 2008 election than in any other national campaign in recent history, Time magazine's Mark Halperin said Friday at the Politico/USC conference on the 2008 election.

"It's the most disgusting failure of people in our business since the Iraq war," Halperin said at a panel of media analysts. "It was extreme bias, extreme pro-Obama coverage."

Read the whole story: Politico

Comments

[mydogshakespeare]

Sour Grapes, Conman? Sounds like you're choking on them Mark. What a SORE LOSER! "Not OUR fault we lost! It was the d**ned Media."

[AnAverageAmerican]

Blah...Blah...Blah...blah...ba

[cooperone]

Just trying to hawk his book!

[cassandrascurse]

I suspect Halperin whipped himself into this epic snit precisely because Obama's victory rendered the book effectively unhawkable. Many of his prescriptions (for winning the White House in '08) now seem quaint and anachronistic.

To be fair, it can't have been much fun watching one's "cutting edge" insights made so demonstrably misguided and obsolete. However, much like his rather touching faith in the unqualified strategic genius of Karl Rove, I trust he'll eventually get over it.

[BrainDart]

The only way the media could be absolutely objective is if writers were alien (as in space) scientists. The media is in the feedback loop of society, it can't help but have it's point of view. It would be more honest and helpful to drop the myth of objectivity.

Another point is to ask when evenhandedness appears absurd. Hypothetically, if Lincoln or Washington were running against Hitler, what would objectivity look like? Hopefully, it would make Hitler look like the worse choice. Perhaps that is one end of a continuum, where basic reporting, because of lopsided facts, tends to color the bias of that reporting.

[TTM]

EXACTLY.

The MSM had the responsibility of exposing Palin's incredible ignorance. The Palin pick was shockingly cynical. WOULD PALIN BE HIRED FOR A MANAGERIAL POSITION IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR ? LOL ...

[Lambpie]

From where I sat, seeking info from all areas, there didn't appear to be much positive to report off the McCain side. Had I been a reporter and told to go write a more positive piece on McCain it would have been difficult to find the angle. Of course Obama ran negative. Only on the right we saw the most nasty character assassination I have ever seen. Since nothing positive came off the right how was the press supposed to make it look more positive? Not to mention the differences in how well the two campaigns were ran. Obama would have one hundred thousand show up to see him, and McCain had to bus in children. Obama would put some new bit of info out there on what he planned to do if he got in, McCain would put more spin out there on why the planet should fear Obama. Meanwhile Sarah seemed to get more coverage than I felt she deserved, while they completely ignored Biden for the most part. They would pick him up if he misspoke maybe. They can only report so much positive on Joe the Plumber? I'd love to know why Fox somehow gets out of this biased argument all the time when they are the worst.

[neocon666]

YAWN!
I've never been able to figure out why the press reporting McCain's choice of a moose hunter with as much sense as her prey and all of her hairbrained misstatements is somehow being bias towards Barack Obama. And Murdock's broadcasting empire certainly holds no bias towards Obama. Sean Hannity is now using (out of context) Rev. Wright speech excerps in the intro to his radio show ("The radicals have taken over!") as if he's part of Obama's cabinet. The media bias toward Bush's load of BS that lead America into the Iraq War has done far more damage to this country than any bias toward Barack Obama ever could.

[justwaitandsee]

“Murdock's broadcasting empire certainly holds no bias towards ObamaMurdock's broadcasting empire certainly holds no bias towards Obama”

And we can also included MoringJealousy, Lou** Dobbs, Wolf-Blister and the entire Obessed with HillaryClinton CNN/Station, David-Gregory, Glen Beckie, ABC, etc

[hopefulinflorida]

If it were Michelle Obama who had stolen drugs and had a drug problem, Obama would not have gotten the nomination. It's always ok for republicans to have drug/alocohol problems. That I know for sure.

[auntiecairo]

Mr. Halperin forgot about the 24-7 coverage of Reverend Wright, Michelle Obama's comment re: loving her country (which was taken out of context), the "cling to their guns comment", - McCain had many missteps which warranted more negative press. Tthere was a rush to attack Sarah Palin - but she/McCain asked for it by promoting her as something she is not -- it took a matter of hours to start dispelling their comments by simple Google searches. Yet McCain and Palin continued the lies throughougt the campaign. Because voters relied on the internet instead of just the MSM (like Time) - most of which are owned by big corporations -- the result was different than in the past. With all the outcry over the NYT article on Cindy McCain - it was amazing nobody had discussed her past sooner - the drugs; the affair between Cindy and John McCain. McCain has enjoyed years of free passes from the press - but when it counted the media began to show McCain for who he truly is - just another politician who is willing to sell out his beliefs for ambition. That's why McCain lost - he sold his brand to the conservative devil of the Republican party. Obama, by virtue of writing two books - beat everyone to the punch by admitting his mistakes. McCain always frames his confessions in the context of being automatically forgiven by tying everything to those years he spent as a POW. And finally that superficial

[lafrance]

There was a study done over the summer by Pew. While Obama got alot of press it was found that about 75% of it was negative.
So, if the press was in the tank for Obama you sure couldn't tell. Most of it was either criticizing the man, people he knew - barely, and anything that could cast a negative light on him.
Very few of those stories were positive or gave the man any credit for anything.
Even with all his policies and white papers and detailed speeches he would make on certain issues, the press kept trying to say the man only talked in generalities and never had any details.
That he lacked any substance.
Now they are whining because they expect Obama to do something. What is he suppose to do. He is not president for 2 months and has no authority. What about Bush. He's still the president and lord knows the press spent the better part of the past 8 years fawning over everything Bush did and said. Especially Halprin.

[FlamingLibrul]

Faux News, Limbaugh, Liddy, Ingraham et al, provided 24/7 coverage of ACORN, Wright, Ayers, Rezko, "Lipstick on a pig," and any other number of so-called Obama scandals. Two days before the election, "Coal gate" was born, from a speech Obama had given in January. The wingnuts have been sceaming "Liberal biased media" for so long, they now believe their own propaganda.

[VPN]

A most applicable quote from one infamous President, they are "catapulting the propaganda"

[jm8]

This was the most universally subjective election I have ever witnessed. I don't believe anyone - media or non-media - was able to remain totally objective. But with that said, the media was doing a fairly good job of unbiased reporting until McCain foolishly went after them for their coverage of Palin. At that point everything shifted, and the wrath of the press came down on him big-time. Hooray! (I say objectively)

[buckbuck11]

I must admit that I no longer watch any network news. I do notice that they didn't mention or explain the whole Keating 5 debacle, they didn't clarify the Fanniemae and Freddiemac situations, but did allow any accusations or statements by campaign spokespeople to go unchallenged and uninvestigated regardless of how egregious the iies became. By their selection of what sound bites to use from a given day's stump speech, the MSM tried to paint a narrative rather than report the news. CNN was notorious in trying to float controversy in their "tease" only to later report that there was nothing to the idea. The mention of an idea is enough to create fact in the minds of our "less informed" (read=ignorant) voters.

[Lambpie]

I concur. I was amazed at the accusations that were allowed to be said by either side, without the press seeing that they did some fact checking on them. Naturally since most came off of McCain's side it was worse for Obama - yet nobody covers that angle as they claim he got a free pass. I know this because I am still deprogramming friends off the bogus spin they bought into.

[jemiltd]

Befuddled, there are still those in denial. Nonsensical reasoning, justifications, excuses from the insane thought that people were somehow hypnotized by the sound of his voice, to the "emotional" voting by African America (never mind the fact that they make up only 12% of the country's population, and not everyone could or did vote), to the purported media bias for President elect Obama (yeah, the repeated looping of the out of context clip of the Wright sermon really worked out well for him, didn't it?). Here's the reality guys: The man ran and won based upon his ability to convey a message that the citizens of this country wanted to hear. If our pencils had been able to change the color of his skin, we wouldn't even be having this conversation. The people of the United States chose to look past the surface and find genuine character and integrity. A refreshing change from the fear and hate mongering. So you folks who are still licking your egotistical wounds and still don't get it can stay in the past or you can make some attempt at realizing you might be wrong. Either way, the rest of us are moving forward.

[Chapmanp2]

Nicely stated...
My Dad, 68 years old, who showed openly racist tendencies well in to his 40s came to the conclusion that Obama was the only rational choice through listening to the debates. He called me on election night after listening to Obamas victory speach & told me the only time he remembers feeling that proud of what his Country had done to elect a President was watching JFK elected. Tell me the media created that...

[PallinAround]

Wow - hurray for your dad. You must be very proud of him.

My only disappointment in Obama is that the lag between the electricity of Election Night and Inauguration Day is so very long and empty (obviously not his doing, but November 4 was such a high, that it magnifies the deep, dark valley we're in right now).

[LarBear]

HoHum.... Another boring MSM Storyline... The Corporate owned MSM stopped defending and protecting the Nation long ago.... The MSM is all about creating Storylines to sell their Product... Thankfully, WE the People have the internet to Fact Check the MSM Storylines...

[skibum]

So being a mother qualifies you for beneficial treatment?

Remind me again how many million dollar houses Michelle Obama owns?

tool.

[Ramirez]

from Wired:
***

Poll: Internet, Fox News Are Most Trusted News Sources
By Chris Snyder November 21, 2008

The web is the most trusted news medium (over TV and print combined), and Fox News is the most trusted TV news source, according to results from a new Zogby poll commissioned by the Independent Film Channel.

Fox ruled with 39.3 percent of those polled beating out CNN at 16 percent and MSNBC at 15 percent.

These results are good fodder for Fox in defending its claims of being "Fair and Balanced" -- it's also interesting to note that more people in the poll described themselves as Democrats than Republicans -- but the majority of Americans seem to also have little faith in the media at all.

The online survey of 3,472 adults two days after the election found that three out of four people think that the media influenced the outcome, and about the same number also think that the media in general is biased.

In the other categories, The New York Times was the most trusted newspaper and Rush Limbaugh (12.5 percent) came out on top among news personalities closely followed by Fox’s Bill O’Reilly (10.1 percent).

Elizabeth Hasselbeck, Stephen Colbert and Chris Matthews were the least trusted personalities, all scoring under 2 percent. ...
http://blog.wired.com/business/2008/11/internet-fox-ne.html

Full poll here:
http://www.ifc.com/static/img/series/mediaproject/media_project_poll.pdf

[kasinca]

I didn't realize real people actually watch FOX Noise. I never allow it in my house. Any network that has Sean Hannity and Bill Orally are phony to the core.

[Ramirez]

What you do is not unusual. Many experts on the left advocate a restriction of information flow into the home. This creates a comfortable mental "cocoon" and a sense that everyone in America shares your views.

[ajax2]

Well done. independent studies, not polls, find that Fox News viewers are the most misinformed people on earth. They include those who say WMD were found in Iraq, and that Iraq attacked the Twin Towers on 9-11. You've done the right thing. Propaganda is not the another side of facts.

[VPN]

What a load of crapola that is and funny too, FAUX Noise, most trusted news source, LOL.

[Gasparilla]

Notice it's an "online survey"? I'm not buying.

[delvis]

Hey Fox has discovered that hate fear and loathing sells. They run fox like a tabloid- -breaking news, fox news alert , teaser lead ins- and Bill O and Sean are the two carnival barkers

[justwaitandsee]

The most trusted for BS and Anti-American Republican Propaganda

[Ramirez]

FOX always scores high in polls. It is the preferred network for Republicans while Democrats tend to split between CNN and MSNBC.

[alieninvader]

Sorry. I don't trust Zogby polling.

[FlamingLibrul]

Zogby is about as unbiased and balanced as Bill-O the Clown. There's a great article with transcript on FiveThirtyEight.com, of a conversation Nate Silver had with John Ziegler of Zogby. Ziegler came totally unhinged when Nate challenged the validity of a push poll he'd done. The poll set out to proove how "Uninformed" Obama voters were. Need I say more?

[Ramirez]

Just for fun name a pollster you trust.

[alieninvader]

I actually trust FOX polling before I trust Zogby. Their methodology is seriously flawed.

[GlenRast]

Online surveys are garbage. This is as bad as the stupid McCain in the lead survey where buried inside was the fact that half the respondents were 'born again'. As for 'commissioned by the Independent Film Channel'.....Why would they want this done? Could it be who owns them? Follow the trail and you end up with a NYC cable company with close ties to News Corp who just happens to own FOX

[Ramirez]

IFC is owned by Rainbow Media.

"Rainbow Media Holdings LLC, a subsidiary of Cablevision, is an entertainment company in the United States that owns the cable channels AMC, IFC, WE tv, Voom HD Networks, Fuse TV, News 12, and several others. It also owns the Video On Demand networks lifeskool (formerly Mag Rack) and sportskool."
-- wiki

[alieninvader]

This is a different Zogby poll, but it gives you an idea of how they operate.

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/11/zogby-engages-in-apparent-push-polling.html

[dphilip]

The MSM chose sides long ago. Regardless of their blatant support for Obama during the campaign, Obama would likely have still won. However, their role and bias in the matter is a settled issue. To deny it so pathologically only serves to erode the democrats credibility further. The advantage of this luxury is that anything that reflects poorly on the left is covered up by the MSM and anything that refelects positively is promoted like the next Hollywood block buster..
Denial of favored media treatment by democrats is like republicans denying the support of the christian right......Please!

[kasinca]

Your reichwingnut bias is showing through. The media loved McSame and his PTA mom.

[VPN]

Denial my a**, I don't know what world your living in but it sure isn't one with rational thinking people in it if you really believe that nonsense.

[dwilkerson]

Most Republicans don't expose themselves to any other media except for Fox News, and of course, Fox News has an interest in convincing its viewers that the rest of the media is biased for the left.

[dwilkerson]

Yes, because it's the credibility of Democrats that's been tarnished.

Denial, indeed.

[alieninvader]

Right...that's why the endless Reverend Wright loops are still going through my head.