Hillary Clinton May Have a Point About Media Bias

Hillary Clinton may have a point about the media bias against her: compare these two pictures from the NY Times Pictures of the Day section.

(Photo: Todd Heisler/The New York Times)

This one comes Feb 28. Long shot, the Senator leading her entourage down (was the photographer not there when she was going up?) The symbolism is too too clear.

This comes from the day before.

Photo: Damon Winter/The New York Times.

Again the message could not be clearer. This is a beloved man whom the masses adore. For these two days these were the only two pictures of the campaign that ran.

But what can you make of this?

(REUTERS/Shannon Stapleton)

While she may have reasons to complain about bias Hilary does herself no favours by allowing pictures like this to be taken. After eight years in the White House you think she and her people would know better than to play into the hands of their enemies like this. Did no one notice this imagery behind her? This is a tight long shot, but I'd love to see the wide angle of what the rest of the stage looked like. Was this a Satanist Rally in Clairsville Ohio? Were they sacrificing backstage?

Of course there is bias, but it's only the natural bias of the wolf pack wanting to tear apart the weakest candidate. It's unfortunate that Hillary, with all her experience, can't seem but to help them.

Comments

[RoseyB]

If anything the media has kept her in the race. When John Edwards lost some races he was declared over-and-done. She loses 11 and is still a vital contender.
And why isn't she getting pummeled about her tax records. Any other candidate would be blasted about the secrecy.

[mommytoo]

I hate all of her whining. What if she become president. Who will she whine to when things aren't going precisely her way?

[verlaine]

Hillary is losing because she's a lousy candidate.

She swings wildly back and forth from a scorched earth, lying, thugish, gutter politician to the woes is me, wah wah, press is out to get me, whining, sniveling, sob sister, crybaby.

Hillary wasn't complaining about press bias a year ago when all the members of the chattering class were anointing her the Democratic nominee.

Hillary is a fake, phony, and fraud when she claims to be the most qualified Democratic candidate.
She pushed Biden, Dodd, and Richardson out the race sheerly because of her name recognition. These guys run circles around her in terms of experience and government service. She has only herself to blame for her current predicament.

On March 4, Hillary will get the rear-end kicking she so richly deserves. Any voter with a pulse can clearly see that Hillary lacks the integrity, character, and gravitas to be President.

Good riddance to Hillary Clinton, the quintessential classless, gutter politician!!!

[PioneerKing]

The swings appear manic. People on her campaign staff and her staff in DC must think she's wacked out.

[Wishb0ne]

Just from an editorial POV, that pic of Hillary leading her team is dramatic, as is the one of Obama in the crowd. The one with Hillary in front of the devil picture I've seen, but not used by any media or certainly by her campaign. I think it's one of those rogue shots, and there's tons of them for every "legit" pic in every election I've witnessed.

I think it has far less to do with media bias against her than it does with media bias to sell eyeballs to advertisers.

[jashbowie]

Of course the media has bias...imp­ossible not to. There is a line however. When the media took Dean's scream and made it into the "Dean Scream", they went beyond bias and into assassination. Hillary does not need the press for this...she is assassinating her own campaign with what seems like passionate determination.

[twohearts]

I'm a news junkie and have been my whole life - it's true, there HAS been a media bias against Hillary for quite a LONG TIME. Is it because men can't handle women in power? Or because she's not as sweet as Obama? Or because he's a more likable, cute candidate, who never "whines" as Hillary is accused of doing? I already voted in California, for John Edwards, and I want the Democrat to win - either one of them!

I don't know. But the bias is definitely there, from the debates to news coverage in general (TV, Newspapers, Blogging sites).

[S1m0n]

Six out of ten americans can't stand Hillary Clinton. Why would the press feel any different?

[maggieb]

The Press should be objective in their reporting, but excuse me for expecting too much. I forget that they too have been mesmerized by the mantra CHANGE.

[ThreeCentsWorth]

It doesn't get more graphic than that. Maybe she is right.

[S1m0n]

Yes, there's a bias. The bias is "Everybody loves a winner".

The shot you decry--Hillary leading her entourage down--is a simple visual reflection of the reality of her campaign. That's why it stings.

Yes, campaigns have an intense interest in controlling the visuals that portray them. No, the media has no obligation of any kind to cooperate. If the campaign would prefer a shot of the Candidate looking powerful and presidential, but if that's not the reality, the media is entirely within the ambit of fairness to find another image which *does* reflect that reality.

[jackbauer0396]

It cuts both ways. If Barack had been unable to pronounce the Russian president's name correctly, it would have been huge news. Hillary couldn't do it, but people ignored it.

[hank48188]

Obama couldn't pronounce the name because he didn't know what the name was, he doesn't have a great deal of knowledge about anything.

[ffa]

"Just two reasons why their attempt to argue that the media is biased against them is absurd. If Clinton had won ten primaries or caucuses in a row, do you think the MSM would have regarded Obama as still viable? And where are their fricking tax returns? Basic transparency on tax returns is a no-brainer for a presidential candidate. And yet she still hasn't done it and has absolutely no good reason for the delay, except to avoid scrutiny of her husband's post-presidential corporate whoring."

Andrew Sullivan

[Ides]

That's cute. A lie, but cute.

[PioneerKing]

Sen. Clinton only knew the name because Tim Russert gave her the name. Her answer was clearly vauge and showed that she didn't have aclue about the man. Russert went on to say that the man was 47 years old and an attorney. Neither Obama or Clinton had the answer.