Study: Media rougher on Obama

I wanted to show this for 3 reasons...

1) The obvious...If there are 100 stories on Obama and 5 of them are negative, that's going to be more thab 6 stories on Mcain with 4 of them negative...(Notice they don't point out the ratio...that would be truthful, and we can't have any of that!)...

2)The Center for Media and Public Affairs itself...Let's take a look...

So the World Net Daily of Liberalism is now considered "credible"...

3) The fact that United Presss International not only brought into this, but decided for themselves that this Center would be a reliable outlet...Thus promoting their own set of values...

"Pay no attention to that vacuum behind the curtain!!!!"...

__________________
"You get the respect that you give" - cnredd

What the heck is McCain doing that WARRANTS coverage?

Obama is going overseas and meeting people.
What is McCain DOING during this time that warrants media attention?
Can you tell me without having to go look it up?


How the heck do you compare CMPA to WND?
That's like comparing somebody ACCUSED of murder to Hitler.

Furthermore, would you care to look at what some of their PREVIOUS statements have said???
OMGosh! They said that Obama was getting the "best" coverage.
Those freakin' liberal liars!!! How DARE they agree with you...

It's interesting to note that you went STRAIGHT for attacking the source, without even bothering to figure out if their claim was valid.


The article's title is: "Study: Media Rougher on Obama"
Not "UPI proves Media is Rougher on Obama".
It's repeating the study claims.

I would be curious how they could have phrased it that would have indicated to you that they were REPORTING on what a STUDY says...

How do you figure? They are stating it in percentages, that is a ratio. FYI, out of 100, that would be 72 negative and only 28 positive. It's mathematical, no assuming involved.

Because there's no mention of the ratio of McCain reports vs. Obama reports. Also, did you just maybe consider that there's just plain more bad news to discuss about Obama than McCain??? Maybe the trail he left behind him is starting to become so glaringly obvious that even his biggest supporters and friends are starting to have to admit that there are some BIG shortcomings with the guy.

__________________
~
~
~

Our nation has not always lived up to its ideals, yet those ideals have never ceased to guide us. They expose our flaws, and lead us to mend them. We are the beneficiaries of the work of the generations before us and it is each generation's responsibility to continue that work. - Laura Bush

God is a conservative -

Ecclesiastes 10:2--"A wise man's heart inclines him to the right, but a fool's heart to the left."

cnredd's original complaint was over the NUMBER of reports, pretending that Obama's hypothetical "five" out of 100 would trump a hypothetical "four" out of six for McCain.
Ignoring the fact that it WAS reported in percentages...

But moving on to your complaint, what the heck has McCain done lately that is ACTUALLY news worthy?
Obama is overseas TALKING to people.
He drew more than 200,000 in Berlin.

What the heck is McCain doing that SHOULD warrant attention in the first place?
Seriously. Can anybody tell me???


I love how this works...
If the press covers Obama positively, it must be favoritism.
If the press covers Obama negatively, then that must be because he's done something bad...

People reveal more about themselves in talking about Obama than they do in analyzing the media...