If major news media is unbiased & fair & balanced, why...?

Question

...did they sheetcan representative Ron Paul? I mean if this was a movie it'd be titled "Silence Of The Paul." I mean they dropped representative Paul into the "porcelain lake", pushed down the chrome handle & as far as their concerned it's "journey to the septic tank" for Ron Paul. I mean I would not care if it was Charles Manson running for office, I would still think the major media should cover ALL candidates as a service to the public. Even many of the polls just simply "deleted" him like no mention what so ever! This generally only happens when some one dose not want the cat to get out of the bag. Like is the major news media corporate in bed with some or all of Ron Paul's competition??? Fair & balanced? You bet, it's FAIR for them to BALANCE the coverage for their benefit!!!

Answer 1

Major news media is biased, unfair and imbalanced; a result of the Ghost of the Comintern, no doubt.

But don't worry; the Fairness Doctrine will fix everything.

See ya at re-education camp, kids...

(PS Bobo-- Let's get Paris Hilton to run for office and see if the press pay attention to her ---)

Answer 2

What - you dont think they are fair and balanced

LOL

Of course they are - they are free to give anyone coverage that they are told to give it too and they keep that coverage balanced - thats why you have the front runners in both the dem and rep parties being portrayed - if you look at it - they are ballanced between the dem and reps

You want more coverage - tell them that - get out there - scream and yell - get that grass roots spirit of your into action and cause things to happen

What you are asking for is MORE republican balance - thats not the same thing - in order to get that they need to decrease the coverage on one to give the coverage to the other - they arent going to do that until they are told to do so

grass roots my frien - grass roots - will need to change that - try the iowa strawpole - if he wins there this might be a highlighting event where people will start demanding to know more about him and less about the others - if he wins the iowa pole and then wins the NH pole - that should be a resounding outcry

This is not up to the papers to do this - its up to us to do it - and ron paul knows this - and so do all the locla grassroots support groups - join one - see what they have and how you can help


make a difference
vote ron paul in 08
before its too late

Answer 3

They cover memories that different media shops forget approximately approximately, subsequently putting them different than for the NBC, CBS, and ABC information courses which cover fantastically much the comparable issues with the comparable slant. Rush Limbaugh isn't on Fox except he's a focused visitor on somebody's software. No station is able to cover each and every thing. They dare to question Obama who has been the perfect hypocrite via asserting he needed a sparkling and bipartisan presidency. He has introduced on neither and has been the least sparkling and maximum partisan president in recent history. Fox dares to question that. consistent with threat the others are the hypocrites.

Answer 4

While there is a lot of bias in the media I do not think that you can fault them on the Ron Paul issue.

They have limited time and space and can only cover so much.

Ron Paul is a fringe candidate with a lot of Internet dorks on his side.

Why would he rate coverage.

Answer 5

They have always covered the major candidates! Paul doesn't even have his name on the ballot in 50 states so he really isn't a viable candidate as he can't win!

Why do you want to spend time listening to someone who can't win?

http://www.cnn.com/POLITICS/

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/

They even have Ron Paul here http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/candidates/

with 2 % of the Republican vote!

Another one from Texas! No thanks!!

Answer 6

it's a monopoly, they same people own all tv news and newspaper.