Allegations Of Media Bias In The 2008 Presidential Election, A California Election Attorney

Legal Whether you live in Palm Desert, California, San Diego, CA, Orange County, Los Angeles, La Jolla, Del Mar, Pacific Beach, Carlsbad, Oceanside, San Marcos, Vista and Escondido or the cities of Huntington Beach, Westminster, Buena Park, Anaheim, Santa Ana, Costa Mesa, Irvine, Newport Beach, Corona del Mar, Laguna Beach, and Laguna Hills, Buena Park, Temecula, Indian Wells, La Quinta, or Palm Springs, and whether you are a California media lawyer, a CA election attorney or Joe the Plumber, unless you never turn on the television or read a newspaper, you have been hearing about media bias in the 2008 Presidential election. The supporters of Hillary Clinton alleged there was bias in the media because she is a woman. Barack Obama because he is a Black-American. John McCain because he is old. And after Sarah Palin was chosen as the Republican vice presidential running mate. it was thrown out again by supporters of Sarah Palin. Undoubtedly, plumbers will soon be alleging bias against their profession as well. But never has the criticism of media bias been turned up so high as it has been since the selection of Sarah Palin as John McCain’s running mate. First their were allegations of bias as a result of questions whether she could lead the country and still be a mother to her children. There were criticisms of her and allegations of conspiracy to hide who was the real mother of her youngest child. Then more criticisms when it was learned that her seventeen year-old daughter was pregnant and unmarried. While many of the attacks on Palin came in blogs and less than mainstream media, members of the Republican party alleged that they were proof that the media as a whole was biased. Following her first interview with Charles Gibson, it was alleged that Charles Gibson had been condescending toward Palin. Part of this probably resulted from the way Charles Gibson wears his glasses halfway down his nose making it appear that he is looking down at his interview subject. But most of the attacks on Charles Gibson came as a reflex by Republicans to attempt to cover up for Ms. Palin’s confusing and poorly thought out responses to some of his questions. Still shielding Sarah Palin from the media, only her second interview was allowed to be conducted by Sean Hanity. In that interview she showed what was to .e in later interviews with this response: Well, there is a danger in allowing some obsessive partisanship to get into the issue that we’re talking about today. And that’s something that John McCain, too, his track record, proving that he can work both sides of the aisle, he can surpass the partisanship that must be surpassed to deal with an issue like this. Sean Hanity did not bat an eye. But then weaving in the same bunch of malarkey in an in.prehensible form, she said in only her third interview to Katie Couric since being chosen to run with John McCain, What I think Americans at the end of the day are going to be able to go back and look at track records and see who’s more apt to be talking about solutions and wishing for and hoping for solutions for some opportunity to change, and who’s actually done it? After one more in.prehensible response after another to Katie Couric’s softball questions, even Kathleen Parker, a syndicated columnist and a regular on the Bill O’Reilly Factor, and a conservative who initially cheered her selection, concluded that she is a problem and for the good of the country should step down. When Kathleen Parker regretfully found herself having to declare in her own column that Sarah Palin is out of her league, after initially pulling for her, all the wind was let out of the sails of the claim that the media was biased. Bias in the media thus depends, unfortunately, not just on what is being said, but also on who is saying what. When criticisms are leveled by the other candidate’s party and by members of the other gender, it is more likely to be labeled bias by those sticking up for the candidate. But when the criticisms are leveled by a well-respected person of the candidate’s own party and own gender and the criticisms are this severe, the candidate has a real problem and it is not due to media bias. As a media and election lawyer, there is certainly bias in the media by the different television stations but it seems based less on whether the candidate they are biased against is because of their gender, age or race but rather is based on if the broadcast .pany is biased toward the Republican party candidates or the Democratic party candidates. Surprisingly there is less of an allegation than one would suppose against two news channels that are well recognized fervent supporters of one candidate over another. Even the candidates have made jokes how some of the hosts on MSNBC favor Obama and how many of the hosts on Fox News favor McCain. When a broadcast .pany, or a newspaper or a talk show host is biased against a certain candidate, they will use any and all criticisms they can create, truthful and some not, to persuade their listeners, readers or viewers to vote one way and not another. This is still bias, but it seems to be less motivated by age bias, gender bias or racial bias, (though their attacks on such candidates are sometimes in those categories) as it is based on bias toward one party or another. The 2008 Presidential election, however, has appeared to many to be one of the dirtiest campaigns in history. And while recent attacks have been less and less based on truth than on generating fear in the minds of voters, let us hope that these tactics, as bad as they are, are simply based on the advice of campaign advisers trying to win votes in a shoddy way, as opposed to being motivated by other reasons. About the Author: 相关的主题文章: