Why this US mass-media does NOT give a fair and equal coverage to ALL presidential candidates ??

Question

examples, like Kucinich and Ron Paul ,and others as well....

Answer 1

Fair AND equal is NOT POSSIBLE. Some 'candidates' don't deserve ANY coverage. I don't know about Ron Paul, but Kucinich deserves JAIL time.

Answer 2

I agree. The media anointed Hillary and Obama as front runners before there was the popular support for either thus insuring that no other candidate would get enough of a voice out there to get their point across. If you want proof just look at the Republicans. Most of their candidates get the same amount of play in the media so no one stands out more than the others. Consequently you still have several viable candidates. On the Dem side however the media only seems to push the Hillary and Obama stories so those 2 get disproportionate name recognition time.

Answer 3

They are lazy and sensationalist. Most media outlets would never talk about a fringe candidate because they don't think that people would care. Often they simply interview the other candidates because the front runner won't come on, or because something unexpected happened in their campaign (like Ron Paul raising a mountain of cash). Also, some media outlets simply like to attack candidates, and it's a lot easier to go after someone who's in the spotlight.

Answer 4

LOL, they media doesn't even want to report the full truth or anything that doesn't fit thier agenda, why would they be any different on the Candidates.
Its fact that 96% of the media voted democratic in 2006, its fact that they don't report everything that happens in the world. They embellish if not out right lie under the guise that they didn't have all the facts or that they took someone out of context. I'm all for Amendment rights for free speech, but one day someone will hvae to put the smack down on them influencing America for thier own purpose and profit.
They should have stuck to just reporting the news rather than make it up or report it incorrectly. Then again .....statistically speaking, good news doesn't sell as well as mayhem.

Answer 5

First off the media is biased to the left, meaning they are very liberal minded and tend to promote that agenda. Secondly the 1st tier candidates get the most coverage because of the limited time on television available for reporting various news topics. Lastly there is nothing fair in news reporting especially when it comes to politics.

Answer 6

Because the US media does nothing except monitor the ratings. Honestly, the only media outlet that is covering actual issues is NPR, and more specifically, Bill Moyers.

Oh, and to the person who said the media votes democrat. This may be true, but the owning corporations vote republican. Further, it is just true that the more college education people receive, the more likely they will vote democrat. Are you suggesting that we hire uneducated people to report our news because they will vote republican? Or are you a conspiracy theorist?

Answer 7

If you look at how much a candidate is lobbyed and how much coverage he is receiving you will almost see a perfect equilibrium.

Money dictates who gets what coverage.

Answer 8

Because the rich republicans own the news media and they are overthrowing democracy and the Constitution as they see fit for there own personal profit and personal power.

Answer 9

Why didn't you mention Gravel, Tancredo, Hunter, Thompson?


Why don't YOU give equal coverage?

Answer 10

The majority of the media are Liberals. They have their agenda.
Period.