Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

2016 Postmortem

Doremus

(7,261 posts)

12. Except coverage of the issues was NOT equal - HRC got 4x more coverage

Reply to Hortensis (Reply #5)

Wed Jun 15, 2016, 02:09 PM

Jun 2016

To follow your logic, since Bernie received 75% less coverage than HRC, he benefited far less from the negative slant.

I say it's a ridiculous assertion that anyone benefits from negative publicity. It is however quite disturbing that the media blatantly ignored certain candidate(s) because the public depends on information to make informed decisions. Is it any wonder how we end up with GWBs and similar plutocrats.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

34 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Harvard & Stanford Reviews Document Media/Vote Bias Against Bernie [View all] laserhaas Jun 2016 OP

Stanford/Tilburg paper criticized and was responded to, quickly, with facts laserhaas Jun 2016 #1

Jury results Amaril Jun 2016 #2

Aw -damn... I just lost the bet pool laserhaas Jun 2016 #3

Kickin' for the truth! Faux pas Jun 2016 #4

Pshaw! - Barring an arising Smoking Gun, regrettably, the only way to fix, is Congress or Courts laserhaas Jun 2016 #6

The BIG issue is the strongly negative tone for Hortensis Jun 2016 #5

The old adage, there's no such thing as bad publicity laserhaas Jun 2016 #7

Wow, how about you back up the claim that Sanders built his campaign on ignorance. It's nice to JCanete Jun 2016 #8

The only rationale dat kuud B off'rd - is laserhaas Jun 2016 #9

Maybe go read about populism and the typical Hortensis Jun 2016 #10

That isn't true about Sanders campaign in the least. JCanete Jun 2016 #16

They see she's a Clinton and she's a she and she's a Hillary laserhaas Jun 2016 #17

Except coverage of the issues was NOT equal - HRC got 4x more coverage Doremus Jun 2016 #12

We are pawns of the media, who have no compunction, nor motivation, to be anything other than self laserhaas Jun 2016 #13

You misunderstood my point, and Hortensis Jun 2016 #15

Anyone with a populist message benefits from discontent but the message must be broadcast Doremus Jun 2016 #18

Gotcha. No wonder what's-his-name lost. Hortensis Jun 2016 #22

Still going over this but ismnotwasm Jun 2016 #11

Me thinks the AP thump was a "Red Herring" to cloak the rigs laserhaas Jun 2016 #14

This message was self-deleted by its author NCTraveler Jun 2016 #19

K&R.. disillusioned73 Jun 2016 #20

Thanks laserhaas Jun 2016 #21

I think Hillary won fair and square, but folks should say otherwise bigwillq Jun 2016 #23

Its only a discussion of facts laserhaas Jun 2016 #24

Not much of a surprise. nt eastwestdem Jun 2016 #25

Election fraud is real. peace13 Jun 2016 #26

Exactly.....Liking results of fraud because your pick won laserhaas Jun 2016 #28

KnR nt chknltl Jun 2016 #27

Thanks laserhaas Jun 2016 #29

I regularly just knr-nt stuff i think worthy but... chknltl Jun 2016 #30

Im extremely disheartened as Bernie is our only hope laserhaas Jun 2016 #31

Now #Guccifer2 supplies new info laserhaas Jun 2016 #32

Indepth arguments and empirical math studies are found laserhaas Jun 2016 #33

More and more evidence has arose - but those who benefited by such - don't care laserhaas Jun 2016 #34