Letter: Media bias obscures the facts
To the editor:
Well wasn’t election night exciting, some elated and some depressed with the outcome of the presidential election. For those who are elated because they chose the winner, I’d suggest they glance at their stock portfolio today and their health care premiums for next year. The question you may need to ask yourself is how much are you willing to pay for your victory. For those who have nothing, there is nothing to lose and the idea of income redistribution is quite appealing. For others, not so much.
I’d like to respond to some critics who questioned my using recent quotes from Pat Cadell, calling him a democratic pollster. Just for the record, Pat worked for presidential candidate George McGovern in 1972, Jimmy Carter in 1976 and 1980, Gary Hart in 1984, Joe Biden in 1988 and Jerry Brown in 1992. In addition, he recently worked for Colorado Democratic senate candidate Andrew Romanoff in 2010. True, he did have a major dust-up with a Democratic consulting firm, however given his history I am fairly comfortable calling him a Democrat. In any event, my reason for referring to his comments on media bias is because, in my opinion as well as Cadell’s, most of the major media outlets do, in fact, favor Democratic candidates and unfairly report the news, especially favoring Obama.
Rich Noyes, the director for the Media Research Center claims, “Given Obama’s poor record, Romney probably could have prevailed but for the media’s historical bias being taken to new lows this year, saving Obama’s presidency in the process.”
One could find exceptions to this, however most voters are quite happy to rely on CNN, MSNBC, ABC, the New York Times, CBS, etc., for their information.