"Media Conspiracy" is about the DUMBEST thing to ever suggest.
Journalists make a living, trying to find/report stories that no-one else knows about. That is how "leaks" get reported. Shareholders WANT peopl to watch their TV station or read their newspaper - which they are more likely to do if it is the only source reporting a particular story.
The idea that a news story exists ANYWHERE, which is known about but not reported is INSANE.
2007-10-11 08:01:18
·
answer #1
·
answered by dryheatdave 6
·
3⤊
6⤋
Ron Paul fans tend to believe in a lot of conspiracies. Of course you know, the major media has been complicit in every major conspiracy in the history of the country...from aliens on the grassy knoll killing JFK to everything in between.
The major media has to be involved in every major conspiracy, otherwise the conspiracy wouldn't work. If everybody knows about it, then it's not a conspiracy. If the major media reports on it, then everybody knows about it. If you've got a conspiracy theory of any sort, chances are you've got the major media involved somewhere.
Ron Paul has consistently been a marginal figure in the US House with bizarre views on things. As someone who lived in his district in Texas for a while, I can speak from experience on Paul. He never did anything to help the people in his district. He voted AGAINST relief funding for victims of Hurricane Rita in his district, then he took CREDIT for its passage!
Paul has some, ahem, unorthodox views on things, and those things are being exposed to a national audience. That's why his campaign is not gaining major traction, except with the internet crowd. His supporters are mostly internet based, and the internet has become a bulletin board for the most outlandish ideas and conspiracy theories, so of course, when he does not get the same amount of attention in the major media that he gets on the net, the first word you hear is "Conspiracy!"
And the reason he might have won any online polls after debates is because each of his supporters voted 750 times.
2007-10-11 12:30:18
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
2⤋
Conspiracy? No, not as such. But I think the individual organizations have a pretty vested interest in the status quo, and don't want to cover him more than is necessary. There's more of an easy name recognition factor in the Will Thompson/ Kerry/ Gingrich/ Gore run sorts of stories, and Paul ruins the story lines for a lot of these places.
And of course he's polling low, a lot of polling organizations don't even put him on the list.
And yes, there are a lot of Paul fans out there. Whether that will turn into money or votes remains to be seen. It could be a momentum builder, or just a "Get Clean for Gene" sort of failure.
2007-10-11 08:47:56
·
answer #3
·
answered by Doc Occam 7
·
1⤊
2⤋
YES, but lets get to the "Root" cause!
The media is supported by advertisements that are paid for, many times, by some of the largest wealthiest corporations in the world.
Most of these corporations are not sponsor-ers or contributers to Ron Pauls campaign because they can't receive any political benefits back from Ron Paul, simply because he represents the middle & lower income Americans, and has made it a point to not be influenced by Washington lobby-ists, who work for the mega-companies.
Therefore it's my guess the advertising sponsors, shall I say," influence", the news outlets on their choice of political candidates.
Another reason could be the richer candidates {Many using their own money} are going to spend big money in advertising on the major net-works, and the major net-works are in compitition for those millions of soon to be spent advertising dollars.
If the net-works start telling the truth and exposing their bad qualities now, the wealthy candidates might think twice about spending their campaign money with the news net-work that exposes the real truth about them.
Make no mistake, media & corporate America ARE very worried about Ron Paul's popularity, & I have already seen evidence of harmful political propaganda directed @ Ron Paul!
Thank you for reading.
*******************************************************
2007-10-11 09:05:41
·
answer #4
·
answered by beesting 6
·
2⤊
2⤋
To the girl who said Kerry was downplayed and covered up, you couldnt be more wrong. The news had the whole nation believing that he would win in a land slide. Then what happened? He f*ckin lost. It was a good day. Finally, wouldnt have to look at that guy ever again. He was such an idiot.
2007-10-11 08:41:12
·
answer #5
·
answered by Kevin 3
·
3⤊
0⤋
He just raised 5 million this quarter and he's getting a little more attention because of it. It actually turns out that the so called 'spammers' are real people behind their computers donating money to his campaign, and guess what, he just won msnbc and cnbc's polls right after the last debate. You have to remember that Ron Paul is a truth teller and he's not exactly for big government or secrecy of govt, so they don't want the zombies to actually wake up and see what's going on with the economy and our liberties.
2007-10-11 09:01:50
·
answer #6
·
answered by mom4peace 3
·
3⤊
2⤋
I have seen very little about Ron Paul in the media. However, in my area I see Ron Paul bumper stickers and yard signs pretty much every day. I find it odd that someone with so much grass roots support in spite of a lack of major media visibility is not getting more coverage.
Of all the republican candidates that have announced their campaign Ron Paul is my first choice for the nomination.
2007-10-11 07:58:39
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
7⤊
3⤋
There are many Ron Paul fans out there, but not as many as there are fans of other candidates. It's not a conspiracy, merely that the ratings aren't there for him. If people were really interested, en masse, the media would be reporting it, as it would sell and increase readership / viewership.
If Hillary Clinton is in town, and 5,000 people are there, and Ron Paul is in town, and 500 people are there, who is going to get more coverage?
True enough, Hillary's coffers are larger. If there are lots of Ron Paul supporters out there, they need to send in money and get the message out. You won't get coverage until you get support. You can't say that he doesn't have support because he isn't being reported, and that's why you don't have enough supporters to send in the money... It's a circular argument. The supporters need to take the lead, send in the money, advertise the events, get people there, and THEN, the media will come.
Edit:
To those offering a thumbs-down, please note that I like Ron Paul's Ideas. I like his concepts of foreign policy, non-intervention and such. I wish more candidates would adopt such a policy.
The problem with his campaign, which I pointed out, is merely his relative lack of funding. Look at the numbers, look at the war-chests that the other candidates have. It's simple mathematics.
2007-10-11 08:01:27
·
answer #8
·
answered by Deirdre H 7
·
3⤊
5⤋
I don't support him but it seems to me like he has some online fans but I have never seen him do well in any state or national poll or have a rally on tv or hear about any of his campaign events.
I admire the fact that he is really a libertarian but classifies himself as a republican and so he has some very, very unique positions on issues. However, the combination of his unique positions on issues and his over excited, almost crazy seeming demeanor on tv will probably turn a lot of people off.
He may get more press if he loses the nomination but turns around and runs as an independent.
2007-10-11 08:26:43
·
answer #9
·
answered by Matt M 5
·
2⤊
4⤋
The NWO owns all the main stream media. That's how dictatorships work. Thus, they decide what the general public sees that does *not* go along with their agenda. Ron Paul obviously is not too popular with them. Accordingly, the "peasants" only have the usual propaganda available.
That worked for nazi germany, and that's working well here, too. Interestingly, if you'd like to see something on the exceedingly close ties between the bush family and the nazis, http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8795795223394289910
I'm surprised this is still available
2007-10-11 08:03:23
·
answer #10
·
answered by drakke1 6
·
5⤊
3⤋
Ron Paul is FOR the people of this country...and that is something that the powers that be cannot have.
Too bad that people believe all the BS that they read instead of actually finding out the truth about him.
Too bad the people in this country have forgotten about the Constitution....
So sad.
2007-10-11 08:01:27
·
answer #11
·
answered by Anonymous
·
6⤊
2⤋