In Jeff Cohen's article he paints a different picture than the media is: "Give me a break about John Edwards’ pricey haircut, mansion, lecture fees and the rest. The focus on these topics tells us two things about corporate media. One we’ve long known - that they elevate personal stuff above issues. The other is now becoming clear - that they have a special animosity toward Edwards.
What seems to worry pundits - whether centrist or rightist - is that Edwards is leading in polls in Iowa, where the first caucuses vote next January. And it’s hard for mainstream pundits to paint Edwards as “unelectable.” Polls suggest he has wide appeal to non-liberals and swing voters."
Check out the rest of the article here:
http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/05/31/1570/
2007-05-31 12:39:29 · 7 answers · asked by edith clarke 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Elections
when i lived in the south, i've heard many southerners say "i'd have voted if it was edwards/kerry"
all politicians are extremely wealthy, and this is just slinging mud. and the media circus.
perhaps edwards is a convenient and visible target because he is totally putting himself out there, and has a really strong grip on utilizing the internet. blogging, youtube, rocketboom, even second-life. he's getting a lot of attention in many ways. so it's not surprising that fox news is on his case.
2007-05-31 18:38:11 · answer #1 · answered by Daniel 4 · 1⤊ 3⤋
Pretty clearly, yes. I have a pretty strong suspicion that none of the other candidates live in studio apartments or get their hair done at Supercuts. But you only hear this stuff about Edwards.
John McCain is extremely rich because he married into money. The same is true of John Kerry. If you follow politics, you almost certainly know that about Kerry - it was heavily reported throughout the 2004 campaign. But this fact about McCain, the ultimate media darling, is almost never mentioned.
The biggest problem with the media coverage of politics isn't really liberal or conservative bias. It's that the media selects (or even invents) facts around its narratives, rather than building the narrative out of facts. They have decided to present Edwards as a shallow, self-absorbed pretty boy, so stories that won't fit that narrative get ignored. Stories that do get heavily played up, as do stories that fit their stereotype for Hillary Clinton (manipulative, ambitious b***h) or Rudy Giuliani (America's Mayor, stalwart hero of 9/11) . At least they aren't yet just making up stuff to fit their stereotypes, as they did in 2000 to build up the false claim that Gore was a habitual braggart..
2007-05-31 23:10:46 · answer #2 · answered by A M Frantz 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋
John Edwards was my Senator in North Carolina for 5 minutes before he put his hat in the Presidential ring seeking election in 2004. He used his own state for his own agenda. When he ran as VP with John Kerry, Edwards couldn't carry his own state. Southerners don't soon forget.
2007-06-01 07:57:32 · answer #3 · answered by Debra D 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
John Edwards is a man of no substance. He has already damaged himself, and doesn't need any help.
2007-05-31 19:43:52 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋
No he isn't really in the running right now so I don't think they are out to get him. They say stuff about him because they don't like him because he is fake and full of crap.
2007-05-31 19:58:29 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
No. Pretty Boy John's biggest enemy is Pretty Boy John.
2007-06-01 01:02:37 · answer #6 · answered by yupchagee 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
He needs the media to ruin him? C'mon, the guy's a dork.
2007-05-31 22:53:35 · answer #7 · answered by @#$%^ 5 · 2⤊ 2⤋