Media Gunning For Obama and Democrats

by: Chris Bowers

Wed Feb 04, 2009 at 18:45


Last night, commenter NFR83 wrote:

I just got laid off at ABC

and my best friend works at CNBC.

They don't want Democrats on air. We've been only booking Republicans because "everybody already knows where the Democrats stand"

After all, what are the Democrats going to do? complain? It's the liberal media, right?

I was in a meeting last week where our producer flat out said we needed to "bring Obama's approval ratings down"

Everyone who got laid off this week was an Obama supporter.

Surprised?

This isn't definitive proof of anything, but it would explain why Republicans are dominating the airwaves these days.

Chris Bowers :: Media Gunning For Obama and Democrats

Tags: , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Media Gunning For Obama and Democrats | 56 comments
scary. (4.00 / 1)
good to have confirmation of what we all could see with our own eyes, i suppose.  

this is why obama needs to not alienate those who helped get him elected.  

What an excellent source! (1.33 / 3)
In other "news," my friend Suzy says Coca-Cola is an effective contraceptive.

Who knew?

(Editor's note: This "article" was a prank to see how many faithful readers would believe anything that appears on OpenLeft.  But "Jacob Freeze" just had to spoil it! Boil him in Coca-Cola! Poke out his eyes!)  

[ Parent ]
Why NOT complain? (4.00 / 3)

  The FACTS are that the Democrats are being blacked out of the media. Pointing that out wouldn't constitute a "complaint".

  The Democrats HAVE to raise a ruckus about this. Or it's just going to get (even) worse. But if, as the poster suggested, the Dems seem to be AWARE this is a problem, that's a big breakthrough right there.

 Oh, and some antitrust legislation targeting media conglomerates wouldn't hurt...  

"We judge ourselves by our ideals; others by their actions. It is a great convenience." -- Howard Zinn

We SHOULD complain (4.00 / 6)
and I HAVE.

The big boys in the producers chairs don't think the public will listen to our complaints because they think the media is on our side already...and so therefore when they're not on our side, it means they're unbiased.

Maybe their right...we won't know if we stay quiet.

MediaMatters has heard from me...maybe something can be done.  

[ Parent ]
Bravo... (0.00 / 0)
That was great...I hope they can do something with it.

"Incrementalism isn't a different path to the same place, it could be a different path to a different place"
Stoller
[ Parent ]
Democrats ARE the MEDIA (0.00 / 0)
Stephanopoulos even conferences with the Obama White Daily on Strategy.   You have no free media. You have Obama cheerleaders.
[ Parent ]
Time for "Cancel Your Cable TV Day" (4.00 / 1)
Look folks, nothing good is on anyway.

Why not organize a day of media protest, and on that day everyone CANCEL their cable plan for a week, a month, or until there's an end to this right wing slant.  

[ Parent ]
More and more... (4.00 / 2)
...I think that this is all indicative of twin challenges facing the Obama Administration: the communications and activist arms of its political operation are not operating at full speed.

I get that CNBC doesn't like us, or Obama, or the Democrats. But we shouldn't need CNBC. The President of the United States, through Organizing for America, has access to 13 million people and everybody who lives in their associated households. He has that influence in an unprecedented era of person-to-person communications outreach, in addition to the traditional levers of presidential messaging.

Instead, we're being asked to have house parties.

I'd say the failure of the communications operation is evident on its face. The Administration has lost control of the American people's perception of this bill, despite control of all levers of government and a +9 partisan identification with the party in power.

Submitted for your approval. So how do we reverse the effects of this problem? And, for fun, "annihilate all corporate and free trade Democrats" is not a viable answer in this exercise; they're not going away before this bill comes up for a vote.

In my experience the only people who watch CNBC (4.00 / 2)
are financial industry types and wannabes (and Erin Burnett fanboys), most of whom already believe, and need to believe, the tripe that they regularly put out. This was always Jack Welch's pet network, where he and his minions could regularly spout off on their self-worshipping and free market-boosting drivel while overcompensating for their lack of human substance. Perhaps the solution is for the progressives on MSNBC to call them out on their BS and maybe embarrass them into having on more progressives by calling them chicken.

I swear, if I hear one more talking head invoke Amity Shlaes, I'm going to hurl something at my TV!

"Those who stand for nothing fall for anything...Mankind are forever destined to be the dupes of bold & cunning imposture" -- Alexander Hamilton

[ Parent ]
The above comment was meant to respond to the diary (0.00 / 0)
But yeah, I agree. We need an alternative communications process and infrastructure. And Robert Gibbs is an awful press secretary. He comes across as having slept 2 hours the night before and very Dilbert-like. Obama needs better people in charge of communication FAST.

"Those who stand for nothing fall for anything...Mankind are forever destined to be the dupes of bold & cunning imposture" -- Alexander Hamilton
[ Parent ]
gibbs isn't the problem (0.00 / 0)
people don't pay attention to the daily white house briefing
[ Parent ]
They sure paid attention when Fleischer was there (4.00 / 2)
It's a direct mouthpiece for the president. If they want it to be paid attention to, they can make it so, and do so effectively. It's an unexploited channel of communication.

"Those who stand for nothing fall for anything...Mankind are forever destined to be the dupes of bold & cunning imposture" -- Alexander Hamilton
[ Parent ]
Eh... (4.00 / 2)
As someone who has watched more CNBC than he would ever like, they always have more Republicans on than Democrats. They were doing this when the GOP still controlled everything in Washington.
Is it still what they have all the TVs tuned to on Wall St.? (4.00 / 1)
It was when I worked there, back when the Money Honey was their big star.

"Those who stand for nothing fall for anything...Mankind are forever destined to be the dupes of bold & cunning imposture" -- Alexander Hamilton
[ Parent ]
Overthrown media idol:Bill Clinton (4.00 / 8)
People forget that when Bill Clinton was first running that he was a media darling just like Barack Obama was in this campaign. I remember adulatory articles in the NY times by Michael Kelly (who trashed him later) and his was just one amongst many.  And then like that old Abbott and Costello joke about a killer.."slowly he turned"

The media turned against Bill Clinton and by inauguration time they along with willing accomplices in the Republican party, though it was hard to know who was using whom, had given him one black eye after another.  

This is not unexpected...this was foreordained.

But I think this must be given lots more play...lots more play....it needs to make it into the media's own radar screen.

"Incrementalism isn't a different path to the same place, it could be a different path to a different place"
Stoller

This is what's frustrating (4.00 / 4)
This is not unexpected...this was foreordained.

  How could the Democratic leadership NOT see this coming?

   

"We judge ourselves by our ideals; others by their actions. It is a great convenience." -- Howard Zinn

[ Parent ]
All of this has happened before, and all of this will happen again? (4.00 / 2)
I don't exactly want to live by the above mantra, and so even if a reversion to form was foredained, the American people are not going to care.

We've all lamented how much it sucked to have "weak" party voices in the 2001 - 2007 era, but blaming the media will be seen - and is - a sign of weakness. Nobody likes attacking the referees, and after all, we've got the greatest Presidential communicator since before the Jets won the Super Bowl.

kovie, I disagree about Robert Gibbs as an individual - I think he's effectively disarming, and did a good job handling Daschle Day, his first real crucible. I do wonder if this has to do with the larger communications infrastructure. I have no information to back this up, but I wonder if Ellen Moran as Communications Director is the weak link. And, ultimately, I think traditional tools like Gibbs' daily briefing can be effective if they evolve.

Nor should we expect CNBC's sister network to come to our aid.

Ultimately, it's a larger point than just CNBC. Once again, Lucy pulled out the football; once again, we all got stood up at the prom; once again, the mainstream communication outlets don't share our priorities.

Yet we have to tools to create our own success. How do we convince the people at the top, holding the reigns, to unleash the beast? If the campaign can bring 100,000 to  Portland to see Obama, can the White House really not rally that many people in five cities to Stand Up for the Stimulus?

How do we convince them that they can?

[ Parent ]
This is, I think, a little different (4.00 / 5)
People don't understand this economic stuff and waited for someone to tell them about the stimulus...and that's where the media parachuted in with their lies and right wing bias.

I've worked in the media for 10 years and I can honestly say, I never saw such blatant disregard for the truth in my life on the airwaves...never exepcted it. I was utterly and completely shocked at what I saw and heard in the production rooms.

Obama is the first President in history to have to contend with 14 channels of nonstop news giving aid and ocmfort to his political rivals...14 channels that the public still believes belong to his side of the political spectrum.

The best way to fight against this might be to out the media mouthpieces for teh liars and cheats they are. Discredit them like the right did to Dan Rather.  

[ Parent ]
here here (4.00 / 1)
Are the media real political rivals, or are they just incapable of breaking their mental presdispositions?

It has been so painful to watch the economic collapse happen over the past year, and know that, just like the run-up to the Iraq War, the only voices that would get through are the predictable ones (dem=spend/cons=fiscalcons)...It's as if the media is running on an autopilot that was designed back in 1989. They are comfortable, and predictability is a part of their brand.

[ Parent ]
correction (4.00 / 7)
Media Gunning For Obama and Democrats
Media Gunning For people that appear soft and vulnerable

you must play hardball

put aside the bipartisanship BS; the gop won't cooperate; they want you to fail

Tough (4.00 / 4)
As far as I'm concerned the left-leaning media and the grassroots have done a piss-poor job promoting the positive aspects of this bill, which if anyone actually took the time to read would come to realize is actually pretty good (the House bill of course).

Instead of supporting President Obama, the left has joined in with the right to 1) complain, 2) complain some more and 3) complain even more.  So the media has picked up on that and have run along with an "attack, attack, attack" angle on the bill.

At times I think President Obama is the only adult left in this country.

dgf (4.00 / 3)
BINGO! "WE" should be hitting back hard as well. But "we" don't because "we" want to criticize Obama. This is what I don't like about our side. We complain that the Republicans are hitting us, and what do we do? We hit ourselves too. It's so frustrating.

Now, you have people here who are fretting that the stimulus bill is going to be further weakened when just last week, everyone here was saying, "it doesn't have this. It doesn't have that." "The bill sucks."  

[ Parent ]
there are complaints and there are complaints (4.00 / 4)
Complaining to make it better, complaining about Obama empowerting republicans to make the bill worse is postive complaining.

Complaining that unemployment benefits is not stimulative and wanting more tax cuts is negative.

There are good critiques and bad critiques.  

The good critques, if heeded, would have made the bill better and would have put the bill in a postion to pass.

Now Obama empowering Republicans to stand in his way...is very worthy of criticism.

"Incrementalism isn't a different path to the same place, it could be a different path to a different place"
Stoller

[ Parent ]
okay (4.00 / 1)
you say Obama is "empowering" the right. Haven't members of the left been doing the same thing we they assailed the bill, that they now fear won't be passed? I think Obama definitely needs to get tougher, and we see him doing that now. But the left doesn't do itself any favors when we rip the bill and leave out an attack on the right.
[ Parent ]
It needs to be a good bill (0.00 / 0)
There is a risk of letting the perfect get in the way of the good, and we're not going to get a perfect bill. But we need a good bill, and the window for a good bill has probably closed. No bill is bad. A bad bill is probably worse.

Conduct your own interview of Sarah Palin!
[ Parent ]
I don't think (4.00 / 1)
we accurately got there and made the case for a "good" bill.

The fact is we want a bigger bill, with more infrustructure development, more job creation, etc.

The Republicans and their media allies want a smaller bill.

We didn't effectively make our case, and as thus all the public heard was "oh hey, everyone thinks this bill sucks, and the pretty lady on TV says it's too expensive and has a lot of pork, so I hate the bill too"

In the meantime, we're expecting Obama to make our case...Obama liked the bill the way it was...we didn't.  

[ Parent ]
what's wrong with empowering the left? (4.00 / 1)
That would be good.  

"Incrementalism isn't a different path to the same place, it could be a different path to a different place"
Stoller
[ Parent ]
If we weren't already empowered (0.00 / 0)
then we're probably never going to be.  
[ Parent ]
irony was my intention (0.00 / 0)
i see i didn't succeed

"Incrementalism isn't a different path to the same place, it could be a different path to a different place"
Stoller
[ Parent ]
No (4.00 / 2)
What you appear to be saying is that we should have shut up and accepted the bill, which with all its shortcomings is closer to the right's position than to the left, because otherwise we will empower the right.

Either you haven't explained your position clearly enough for me, or you are smoking some very good shit.

Forgotten Countries - a foreign policy-focused blog

[ Parent ]
Yes and No (4.00 / 1)
Well you know that the Republicans are banking on the left destroying Obama. I think there's some truth to that but none of this would occur if Obama wasn't always dissing the left.
[ Parent ]
dsfd (4.00 / 1)
Always dissing the left?

Come on. This is ridiculous. Granted, Obama should have known that the left wanted what the right got with Bush -- undying loyalty with few exceptions. But just because he's not giving you that, that doesn't mean he's always dissing the left.

[ Parent ]
Well I wouldn't want to "govern" like Bush (0.00 / 0)
but at least give the appearance that you appreciate the left.
[ Parent ]
That is not our job (4.00 / 5)
We are not the media team for Barack Obama. He employs people which much higher media profiles than we have to promote his policies for him. He can even do it himself.

But that's not our job. We were not created ex nihilo to act as a Greek chorus for the President. We have our own ideological issues, they aren't being addressed properly and so it makes no sense for us to just roll over and play dead.

The bill is being attacked because nobody really likes it much and the Obama administration hasn't defended it, not because a nebulous group of private citizens on the internet didn't clap loud enough.

Forgotten Countries - a foreign policy-focused blog

[ Parent ]
Same old story. (0.00 / 0)
Vanity of vanities, saith the Preacher, vanity of vanities; all is vanity.

What profit hath a man of all his labour which he taketh under the sun?

One generation passeth away, and another generation cometh: but the earth abideth for ever.

The sun also ariseth, and the sun goeth down, and hasteth to his place where he arose.

The wind goeth toward the south, and turneth about unto the north; it whirleth about continually, and the wind returneth again according to his circuits.

All the rivers run into the sea; yet the sea is not full; unto the place from whence the rivers come, thither they return again.

All things are full of labour; man cannot utter it: the eye is not satisfied with seeing, nor the ear filled with hearing.

The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun.  

Conduct your own interview of Sarah Palin!

ddfg (4.00 / 2)
Chris, this is why you aim more ammo at the other side, than your side, even when you have qualms with what your side is doing. Republicans know this. Wise up!
read my reply to you farther up (4.00 / 4)
Obama has done this to his bill.  His own actions laid it open to being filibustered.  He was more concerned with illusion of bipartisanship (with Republicans it's still our way or the highway) than with making sure this absolutely essential bill pass but also that it pass with enough heft to actually work.

Now he's in danger of either not passing the bill at all or passing a bill that will not have enough punch to matter.

He should have listened to the criticism...in his news conference today he looked angry and stunned.  Maybe a real push from him could get it over the hump...he needs only 2 Republicans.  Hell he should tell Gregg to vote for it or else forget the Commerce post.

"Incrementalism isn't a different path to the same place, it could be a different path to a different place"
Stoller

[ Parent ]
What criticism? (4.00 / 2)
All the criticism the public is hearing is that it's already too big of a bill and needs tax cuts and that's he's not bipartisan enough
[ Parent ]
Looked angry? (0.00 / 0)
Well, he has a right to be angry when the opposition is distorting his bill while Rome is burning. I saw the video, and he didn't look angry to me. Now that I am hearing this, I get the feeling that they are going to try to portray him as the "angry black man".
[ Parent ]
They've done it before (0.00 / 0)
or at least tried to.  
[ Parent ]
Looked angry? (0.00 / 0)
Well, he has a right to be angry when the opposition is distorting his bill while Rome is burning. I saw the video, and he didn't look angry to me. Now that I am hearing this, I get the feeling that they are going to try to portray him as the "angry black man".
[ Parent ]
Sorry for the double posting (0.00 / 0)

[ Parent ]
harry truman gives his advice (4.00 / 1)
truman has the best advice for obama
http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsme...
Blame Hoyer, Pelosi and Clyburn. Too stupid to change or...?? (4.00 / 1)
Leaving those three in charge off the 112th- Hoyer and Clyburn in particular, spelled doom for the Dems at the outset.
In conjunction with Emanuel at the White House, the same baaaad policies replete with hidden pork that drove everyone crazy in the past was resurrected again and stuffed into this stimulus bill -while ignoring the needs of the rest of the country.  
BEEN THERE, DONE THAT!

What the f*** is wrong with them to try and stuff those contraceptives into a TRILLION DOLLAR STIMULUS/SPENDING BILL, knowing every Republican is methed out over just thinking about spending anything.

And there's your answer.  Whoever put that in - knew it would doom the bill. Would doom the Democrats, doom Obama's big impact.

Obama used to preach about expecting a different answer out of the same old people and mindsets.

What the new President better to do first and foremost -is to look at which of the Congressional Democratic leaders  are Republican moles.

Rahm Emanuel or Steny Hoyer ... got any ideas??



Nationalism is not the same thing as terrorism, and an adversary is not the same thing as an enemy.

I am getting the feeling that Obama doesn't pull wait the Democrats (0.00 / 0)
Remember there are many who are envious of him.
[ Parent ]
I was suprised too (0.00 / 0)
I thought there'd be a stimulus bill passed -- well by now -- and then a budget bill passed in late March or April with additional, longer-term investments and then a health bill.  Seems that would have been more manageable.  
[ Parent ]
Yesterday Mike asked "What Does Obama Want Us To Do?" (4.00 / 1)
Today he is pointing us to a thinkprogress report showing that the main street media (MSM) is no friend of Obama's.

My anwer to both of Mike's posts is that Obama could launch a "war" against the MSM, and ask his supporters to help him wage that war.

For his own part, he could ask the country to turn off the MSM news, and instead access therealnews.com through the internet (plus support them, being that they receive no corporate or government money). He could give a speech every other week exposing the MSM's tawdry record. He could hold up a copy of Outfoxed in a nationally televised speech, and ask the public to view it. He could remind the public of the role of a free press envisioned by the Founding Fathers.

Of his followers, he could ask them to hold house parties where they invite their conservative friends and family, and together they watch the Outfoxed video, and then discuss it. He can also ask them to put together an entire course on the history, proper role, and actual role of the media in US history, then distribute that over the internet. The house parties could become a monthly affair, their subject the afore-mentioned course, and last, say, a year. Obama could appeal to patriotism, and basically ask all Americans to get educated on the media, as a matter of civic duty.

Personally, I doubt Obama has enough nerve to do as I recommend. But perhaps, if he's mangled enough by the media on the one side, and intransigent Republicans in Congress on the other, he may realize that not declaring "war" on the media means that he's going to be hamstrung at a time when a Depression worse than the last one is threatening. Thus, failure to take the fight to the media-Republican Party-complex (just made up that phrase :-) ) may ensure that he is a 1 term president, who was economically as effective as Herbert Hoover, and as hypocritically smeared as President Clinton.

Here's another idea -  he can have a heart to heart talk with Putin, who is a judo expert. Putin can tell him how to defeat the media, via the media. OK, I'm kidding about getting advice from Putin, but I'm dead serious about the basic idea.

435 Dem Primaries 2012
Coffee Party Usa
TheRealNews.Com

Since the Fairness Doctrine would piss them off (0.00 / 0)
Maybe now would be a good time for Obama to order the FCC to begin to enforce the Fairness Doctrine again. Let's hear all of them go into full fat-boy squeal mode about how repressive it is for a few months. Meanwhile, justice can quickly shut down Limbaugh and Fox for their admitted violations. Reagan didn't hesitate to stop enforcing the Fairness Doctrine twenty-two years ago; Obama shouldn't hesitate to reinstate it; not just on principle because they deserve it, but because he can.

F-ck 'em.

the media needs to be tackled along with the banks (0.00 / 1)
The media is in the hands of a few people who own the banks, the oil etc. They will gun down any president who doesn't follow their agenda.

If Obama is serious about ruling for the America people as their representative and not for the elite, he has to tackle the stranglehold these gangsters have on every aspect of power using the law. He can start by a proper investigation into 9/11 - why did the BBc report the collapse of the 3rd tower 30 minutes early (MEDIA COMPLICITY!) - and put those responsible on trial for setting off a false flag attack that triggered a war and huge profits for the same group.

Also, the banksters resp for this financial crisis need to brough to account. Again, these same people own the mainstream media, so you can't expect objective coverage.

Only good policies will persuade the Amercians to follow Obama. But if they see good policies, they will follow.

If there is no clean break now with the past, no legal action against these people, America could descend into total chaos very soon.

The elite will struggle to keep its grip with more false flag operations, more crackdowns, martial law, people revolt and rebel because they will not accept any more.

pretty inflammatory.... (0.00 / 0)
but assuming this is true - don't you think this principle operates in reverse? the media outlets want profits and things become boring. i believe they are as amoral (not immoral) as politicians. they will do anything to make a buck. when it was popular to support the war, they did. when it was not , they didn't. when it was popular to support bush, they did. when it wasnt, they tossed a shoe at his nose.  
But (4.00 / 2)
If the basic assumption of your post (as I read it) is true, i.e. that the M$M will support the "popular" positions, then why would they be attacking Obama as suggested in the diary?  President O has very high positives and low negatives, if your equation were accurate, shouldn't they be supporting him at every turn?


"It sounds wrong...
     ...but its right."
[ Parent ]
The way they get profits (4.00 / 1)
is by backing the conservative elite. They know this. The conservative elite allows them to consolidate markets, so they don't have to compete, and in return they turn in favorable stories on the elite. Repeat ad infinitum.

Montani semper liberi
[ Parent ]
The MSM Mentality (4.00 / 1)
says that every Obama story, and there has to be one each day, must be "balanced" with a story of a Republican kvetching.  The Republicans know they can say anything, and it will not be challenged.
It's worse lately (4.00 / 1)
It seems like every story of a Republican kvetching has to be balanced by a story of Republican kvetching. They've gone 100% negative.

Conduct your own interview of Sarah Palin!
[ Parent ]
I gotta say NFR83's original (0.00 / 0)
comment does not exactly inspire me with confidence that he/she is being objective, accurate, and balanced in his claims about what went on at ABC.

Without further details and context, mostly his/her sweeping generalizations are hard to believe as stated.

I don't think it reflects well on any of us to take these claims as if they must be true as stated.  

Whether the particulars are true and accurate or not (4.00 / 1)
The stream of "news" I see/hear on my TV appears to be in accord with the story NFR83 is putting down.


"It sounds wrong...
     ...but its right."
[ Parent ]
Media Gunning For Obama and Democrats | 56 comments





Donate to Open Left




blog advertising is good for you
blog advertising is good for you
LIBERAL INSTITUTIONS
STATE BLOGS
USER MENU

QUICK HITS
SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

Home | RSS/XML Feed | Register | Contact

  © OpenLeft 2007-2010, Powered by SoapBlox