WP: Bernie Sanders shares something with Republicans: Bashing the media

[Rose Siding]

snip>Such bashing is far more common for Republicans, who have long complained about a liberal bias among journalists. This year, GOP hopefuls Donald Trump and Ted Cruz have made accusing reporters of slanted coverage a central part of their campaigns.

For Sanders, the complaints are more likely to be about the corporate giants who own news outlets. While those at his rallies lap up such critiques, experts say Sanders’s message is less likely to win over the more moderate Democrats he needs in order to catch Clinton..........

Dennis Goldford, a political science professor at Drake University, said other Democrats could see Sanders’s jabs “as a sign of weakness.”

“Typically, when you’re having trouble with your campaign, you attack the media,” Goldford said........

Goldford, the Drake professor, said Sanders bears some responsibility for drawing relatively less news coverage. The candidate often gives the same hour-long stump speech at his rallies, focused on income inequality and other issues impacting working-class voters, which provides little new material for reporters to write about.

“Look at the word ‘news,’?” Goldford said. “The press wants to know what you have for us today that’s new.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/bernie-sanders-shares-something-with-republicans-bashing-the-media/2015/12/24/f1add2c8-aa51-11e5-bff5-905b92f5f94b_story.html

That makes sense to me. If a candidate doesn't reach far beyond a single core message, what's to cover? It's a tough call because you want there to be a theme to the campaign, but also broaden support and coverage. I commend Hillary for the way she has run her campaign. Just as one issue is well covered and received, boom, another policy initiative is released. For instance, the Alzheimer's issue this past week. In fact, the campaign has been methodical. One week there's a big foreign policy speech, key endorsements the next, etc. She's very good at this!

[saltpoint]

1. The media have performed shamefully

since at least the Reagan administration.

They deserve every harsh assessment that comes their way.

[OKNancy]

3. This is the Hillary group

[saltpoint]

5. The post concerned an attack on

the media which I believe is entirely justified.

[stonecutter357]

6. Republicans love Bernie Sanders

[saltpoint]

7. I accept the negative assessment of

media -- print, radio, cable news, you name it -- on a variety of grounds.

Hillary Clinton insisted there was a right wing conspiracy in which the media were entirely complicit. She was right. As Bernie Sanders is in the present case.

[Rose Siding]

8. She did. But she doesn't blast them about it in her stump speech

like Republicans do. It isn't part of what she's running on. She's running, and winning, in spite of it.

[saltpoint]

9. Hillary's blast was at media generally but

at Scaife particularly, this dating back to his founding the Arkansas Project, which aimed its guns at the Clintons, trying to smear them with allegations.

Times have changed a bit. Bill Clinton spoke at Scaife's final service, offering a eulogy. And the Scaife interest, living on, has endorsed Hillary Clinton.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/strange-bedfellows-hillary-and-scaife/

There can be shifts in political alignments, as there always have been. Some of them work better than others. Ordinary people are the ones who consume the product of media, and so the caliber of reporting determines the level of perception in the country -- and not coincidentally, for the voting population.

[Cha]

21. And, that was in 2008.. Now, it's SOS Hillary after having served in the Obama Admin

And, the President saying that Hillary was one of the best decisions he has ever made.

He also said she'd make an excellent President.

All that other shift is nothing compared to President Obama.. I trust him.

[NastyRiffraff]

2. I'm really tired of the whining

about how the media is "ignoring" Bernie. Are they supposed to report on every stump speech, all of which are essentially the same? Yes, the media is far from perfect, or fair. But as you said, to get media coverage, you have to do or say something newsworthy.

[OKNancy]

4. As far as I'm concerned there is too much Bernie

They don't cover him because he only makes news when he whines about something.

[SunSeeker]

10. Seems the media has been pretty kind to Bernie.

The MSM has not been dredging up embarrassing things from his past.

My complaint with the MSM is all the free press they are giving to Trump, often repeating his bombastic statements without fact check challenge. And yet, ironically, he whines about the media the loudest.

[Thinkingabout]

11. And along with the media, the DNC and DWS, I know there has been bashing of DNC and now

there is DWS, you are right, when it is going badly, bash something.

[question everything]

12. A suggestion

Let's keep this forum to update and inform on Hillary, and, yes, point out the (mis)behaving on DU.

But let's not bash Sanders. We know that even if he wins Iowa and New Hampshire it will be the end.

What bothers me more is the blackmailing by DUers. "If Hillary is the nominee many of us will stay home."

I really hope that DU is not representative of the country as a whole but..

[BlueMTexpat]

13. I agree that we should remain positive about

Hillary and not bash either Sanders or O'Malley.

Our candidate is making a strong showing so far and I am very happy to see that.

As for US MSM, I believe that its performance is at best pathetically focused on "entertainment" and at worst overtly biased towards the RW so I really don't have a high opinion of US media coverage in general. But constantly bashing the media for not providing coverage of a candidate is not a winning tactic.

I do, however, find it extremely frustrating that someone like Trump, a national embarrassment and an a**hole of the worst possible kind, gets so much coverage and am sure that it must be maddening for other candidates - on both sides of the political aisle.

[Rose Siding]

14. My point was a positive comment on Hillary and I didn't bash BS

I noted and contrasted the difficulty candidates have, and Hillary's success, with media coverage.

It's not like I would post anything like this in the Hillary group about Sanders:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/128090045

[msrizzo]

16. Rose, I think your OP was fine.

You shared an article from a mainstream news source and provided your take on it. I don't think it was a harsh hit on Sanders. I know this is a Hillary group primarily, but I also view it as a safe haven for Hillary supporters to discuss the primary in a broader sense without constantly being called on to prove this or prove that, and without having to endure insults against our candidate.

[Cha]

19. thank you for your post, msrizzo.. well said. I think you're right!

[Tommy2Tone]

25. +1 - Very well said

[Cha]

18. Your OP is perfect, Rose.. we're not going to be censored in here, too. Especially

pointing out the facts about Hillary's primary opponents.

Good Grief.. since when are facts bashing? I know bashing when I see it and that's not it.

[Cha]

17. Hi question.. As a Group host, I for one think Rose's OP is perfectly alright. We can point out

the facts about Hillary's primary opponents in her campaign for the White House.

We're not going to be censored in here, too.

Thank you.

[MohRokTah]

15. Attacking the media is always the last resort of failing candidates and campaigns. eom

[BlueCaliDem]

23. Yep. A bad workman will always blame the tools. eom

[Cha]

20. The rwingers are lying when they attack the media for having "a liberal bias".. everyone knows

the media covers for the gop.. like giant corp water boys.

BS is right about the media not covering important issues so much of the time.. but, there's no black out of him.. from what I've read.. he's on all time.

Hillary has run an excellent campaign and it shows in the polls.. thank you for your OP, Rose.

[Nomadas]

22. Sanders supporters don't mention the negativity of Clinton coverage

Sanders coverage is mostly positive. The media hates the Clintons.

[BlueCaliDem]

24. I've noticed that same thing. The only coverage Clinton ever gets is negative against her.

Sanders is a useful tool for U.S. media to bash Clinton some more.

The U.S. media are treating Clinton as they've been treating President Obama - horribly, and with the least positive coverage.

Trump gets all positive coverage (he's strong, outspoken, plainspoken, refuses to be p.c., strongly goes after his opponents or anyone who dares to challenge him with some perceived insult, and crushes them, etc.) while the same talking-heads and pundits word their reporting on Clinton to have it come across negatively, making her look weak and gaffe-prone (two things she's not and has never been).

They used the same tactic against President Obama after his one-day honeymoon after being inaugurated was over (before that, he received huge amounts of positive coverage because they wanted him to defeat Hillary Clinton), and President Obama hasn't been able to catch a break since.

We now see clearly who U.S. media as a whole are against...the People.

[Tommy2Tone]

26. My issue with Bernie's media bashing is it's not productive

Like most of his ideas this is DOA. He seems to vent about one thing or the other to attract followers not solve anything. He hardly ever has a solution only a problem.