Has the Media now embraced Howard Dean?

[Patriot_Spear]

I've watched several different outlets this morning- CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, HNN (NOT Fox)- and all the coverage of Dean has been flattering, with upbeat images and positive sound bites.

So my question is, has the Media now embraqced Dean because of the Gore endorsement? How does this change the dynamic? Will the hand-wringing angst by the supporter of other candidates expressed here translate to non-political junkies? (I count myself in with the junkies, folks)

I didn't hear so much as a hiccup about the candidates (other than Lieberman's whining); This seems a bit unfair to me.

What do you guys think?

[demnan]

1. I don't think the media embraces any Democrat

but at least they have to notice Dean when they do their "Horse Race" reports on how the nomination process is going.

[mmonk]

2. What do you mean "now"?

They have been pushing the assumption he has it wrapped up for awhile now.

[Patriot_Spear]

3. I got the impression that it was in question- up until today.

But the tone has definately changed in the last 24 hours.

[xultar]

4. SOOOO TRUE...WHADDYA MEAN NOW!!!!

The RW media figured out that the attacks on Dean made him more endearing to his supporters. They saw how his numbers jumped after the Debate in IA. What did they do next...They sent a RW to VT to attack him a coupla days later.

They've been hammering him because they knew it would make his supporters rally.

Ya'll are being played like a violin. Don't get me wrong, I do pray that Dean gets the nomination.

[MrTriumph]

5. Lapdog Press at Work

Marching orders from Rove are being put into motion.

Notice the complete media blackout about the traitor in the White House that outed a CIA agent for political reasons?

This is a HUGE story. When was the last time you heard anything about it reported?

[liberalmuse]

6. Ick! I hope not.

I don't see the media embracing any Democrat, and if they do, they will do so only because an embrace is the first stage of a choke hold. I don't want the same lips that have been kissing Bush's ass to get near our candidates--most of the mainstream press has lost all credibility.

[KittyWampus]

7. The Media Annointed Dean With TEMPORARY Teflon A Long Time Ago

and the 5% negative coverage he gets is similar in nature to the 5% that doesn't "Vote" for a dictator in a banana republic... after all 100% wouldn't be realistic...now would it?

[Yupster]

8. WE may be entering the build up Dean period

which will then be followed by the tear Dean down period.

[Patriot_Spear]

9. That's what I'm thinking...

Oh well...

[Racenut20]

12. We are Wellllllllllllllllllllllll into the "build up" phase...

General Clark's campaign is faltering, Gephart losing touch with his base, Kerry can't communicate, Sharpton should get off the stage cause he has no money. etc etc etc. Dean Dean Dean. Swear to the Heavens if I only watched news I would think the primaries were over and this was the general campaign.

[Monte Carlo]

10. The media loves neat, pre-packaged stories.

And I'd say the Dean-Gore pairing qualifies as such. They can continue right where they left off in 2000, nitpicking and over-analyzing ever single word that comes out of either of the two's mouths.

[CWebster]

11. Look, how can they avoid him?

That is the question.

There is a fine photo of Dean on the cover of the NYTimes this morning, but the accompanying article portrays the endorsement as a calculated political overture on the part of Dean, as if Gore was little more than some easily flattered dupe. It was more of the same cynical, catty back-stabbing, low-ball smear they always hit Gore with.

And the NYTimes is pilloried for being the"liberal" establishment rag?

[in_cog_ni_to]

13. Now?

Dean has been the only candidate that they give endless coverage to. It's no different than it has been for months. I'm not at all surprised by the non-hiccup from the media in regard to the other candidates...nothing new.

I don't know how this will translate to non-political junkies, they're busy Christmas shopping...but it has motivated me to me to work even harder for the Clark campaign and I WILL step up my activism for him.

[Patriot_Spear]

15. I don't see it that way...

I'd say the coverage was pretty eveny split up until 48 hours ago- now there is an clear spotlight on Dean to the exclusion of other candidates.

[DemBones DemBones]

30. No way was coverage even until 48 hours ago! No way!

I don't see much hope of convincing you that Dean is indeed the corporate media's fair-haired boy, Democratic version, but lots of others have noticed it. In one debate a couple of months ago, Dean was allotted 14 minutes for his answers while Kucinich got less than 5 minutes! Fair and balanced? And it wasn't even on FOX!

I've only seen this media bias toward one candidate in 2000 and in this election, and I remember back as far as Ike defeating Truman.

I really don't like the media -- or Al Gore, for that matter -- influencing our primary elections so overtly. We MUST beat Bush next November! We need the BEST nominee to do that. And I think Dean will be killed on his lack of foreign policy experience, his position changes, and personal issues.

[blm]

14. NOW? The corporate media gave him a press plane last JUNE, fer chrissakes.

Have you all been in a deep slumber. They attacked Kerry and Edwards for months, ignored Kucinich, tolerated Gephardt while pumping up Dean. From the moment Dean started attacking the other Democrats, the media has focused on him.

[Patriot_Spear]

16. Look BLM, nothing personal but your anti-Dean bias is well documented...

Your opinion I take with an exceptionally large grain of salt.

Just my two cents.

[DemBones DemBones]

19. Well, you can ignore blm and me and others who don't

like Dean, but beyond not liking him, we honestly think he can't beat Bush.

What happened to all the ABB preaching around DU? To me, ABB means we have to nominate the guy who can defeat Bush. I'm not convinced Dean is that guy. Maybe I'll be convinced after the primaries but there's been such a rush to say "Dean has it sewed up." This is very risky.

Would you rather have Dean be the nominee and lose, or someone else win the nomination and beat Bush?

If you ask me whether Kucinich should be the nominee or someone else, someone everyone can agree that the primaries show can beat Bush, I am damn well not going to say Kucinich. I want to go with the guy who'll beat Bush.

[Patriot_Spear]

21. I'm ABB, absolutely, but candidate partisanship is rampant around here

Whether you think Dean can win or not is inconsequential, we won't who can win until they actually try to do it.

You don't see Dean supporter running around saying 'Clark can't win' or 'Kerry can't win'. There is a clear agenda in the 'Dean can't win' camp and it's not an ABB stance- it's an ABN campaign.

There are a few people on here who've made it plain they're not here to support a candidate- they're here to oppose Dean.

These people are no better than Karl Rove's puppets for falling for this nonsense.

[blm]

22. Yeah, because I noticed the media bias for Dean MONTHS ago

that you and others are just noticing NOW?

Maybe if YOU had noticed the bias months ago you'd be more skeptical about dean, too. There are more folks who see it than just me, PS.

Why not address the fact that the corporate media gave Dean a press plane last June right after Kerry said he was filing a Senate resolution against the FCC decision?

[DemBones DemBones]

17. When I read your header, I thought " Now? They've been kissing

up to Dean for months and months, casting him as THE anti-war candidate." Clark and Kerry got little flurries of attention but it's been Dean, Dean, Dean 98% of the time.

The media have been pushing Dean the way they puched Bush in 2000, right down to glossing over his gaffes as they did with W. Now that Gore's endorsed Dean, maybe they'll start attacking Dean as a surrogate for Gore.

One thing's for sure, if Dean is the nominee, don't expect Bush and Dean to get equally fair and balanced treatment from the media. Expect them to favor Bush during the general election campaign, giving the nominee less coverage and also negative coverage.

Corporate-owned media, remember. And Dean has said he'd break up their monopolies, as have other Dems, Kucinich, for example.

[Patriot_Spear]

18. I keep hearing that, but to me it wasn't the case...

From my perspective, the coverage looked pretty evenly covered- but Dean did have more 'buzz' because of his firey positions.

[DemBones DemBones]

23. Others have fiery positions, too. Kucinich spoke against the war

on the public record by February 17, 2002 (not 2003, but 2002) when he gave his great speech "A Prayer for America." But in the days when both were pretty much unknown to the general public outside Ohio and Vermont, respectively, Dean was credited with being the anti-war candidate and Kucinich was ignored. "Dean proposes universal health care!" was another media story, completely ignoring the plans put forth by Kucinich, Gephardt, Braun, etc. And Dean's plan isn't universal health care, either, it's a more modest proposal.

But please read my post above -- as I say there, blm and I and others with "anti-Dean bias" really, really want to win in 2004 and don't think Dean's the one to do it. I'll be watching the primaries to see if they change my mind.

[Myra]

20. No, the media embraced Dean long ago. And rammed him down our throats...

ever since. They annointed him. And are programming the
masses with their constant focus on Dean Dean Dean...

[parasim]

24. the way i see it

Dean was one of the few democrats that did not completely thrash the media in last night's debate.

Let's see...

- Sharpton had a few choice oneliners to counter Koppel's inane questions about his lack of money and put Ted (and the rest of the media) in his/it's place,

- Dennis K. berated the media for focusing on campaign money and polls,

- CMB stood her ground when Koppel basically told her to give up the ghost and get out of the race (not in some many words but that's what he was saying).

- Even Kerry lashed out against Koppel/the media for making such a big deal of his use of the word "fuck" in the Rolling Stone article by telling him where Ted could put his polls.

Yet, when Dean was asked that backhanded question about whether it is ever OK for a president to lie to the american people and Dean sheepishly said that it was ok if people's lives are at stake... What's that all about, Dean basically said that it was ok for the president to lie to the american public and not a word from the media today on that?

So, my take on it is that the media wants to just bypass the Primary process and pick the nomination. But what do I know, I'm just a lowly under-100 poster here on DU...

[John_H]

25. Sure. Until he wins the nom. Then the ho-o-meter dial will be turned

to the "chimp" position. Then Dean will suddenly be "weak" and "inexperienced" on national secirity. Then they'll start doing their jobs: which is to point out that Dean's record looks not alot like his rhetoric. Then we'll be fucked.

Interstingly, by bashing Clark now, the media is unwittingly innoculating him for the General Election. What's KKKarl going to have them report that Americal hasn't heard--and largely rejected--already?

[zeemike]

26. The only reason they focus on Dean now is

To invite the others to attack each other. That should have been obvious to us if you saw the beginning of the debate where it was all about the endorsement.
What Ted did not work because most of the candidates did not comply and bite at the bate. I think the demos have finally wised up to the tricks and are finally taking charge of the debate.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

27. My first media impression this morning

was an NPR news update on Minnesota Public Radio's music station.

After the news about the people killed in the Middle East on both sides, it mentioned the New Hampshire debate, but acted as if Howard Dean was the only participant.

I should think that Kucinich's and Kerry's zingers against the media would have made better sound bites, but perhaps the media are miffed that someone called them on their superficiality.

[cryofan]

28. You CANNOT be serious! The media ANOINTED Dean weeks ago...

He is the apple of the elite media's eye. For example:
A google search of the NY Times website yield 120 pages of hits for "howard Dean", and only 4 pages of hits for "dennis Kucinich".

[SoCalDem]

29. They have embraced him, much like a python embraces a rabbit

They are staying "close" to him, feigning interest, but they are checking carefully for that little chink in the armor.. Once they truly find it, they will get out the commercial canopeners and start peeling..

The media seems to always find their "energy" when they are covering anyone who is NOT George W. Bush..

Bush HAS the power to exclude them..The candidates do NOT.. No candidate can afford to be too critical of anyone in the media.. To do that would be to invite a barrage of criticism..

Bush can afford to do it, because the media is too timid to take on the WH.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

31. Whaddya mean NOW? They've been pushing Dean now for months...

n/t

[QC]

32. When were they ever *not* embracing him?