How is the media going to spin this one? (Dr. Paul in Nevada)
So after repeated snubs by the media, I’m happy to see Ron Paul beating McCain for 2nd place in the Nevada GOP caucus today. As of now he’s holding 2nd by a few hundred votes, but not all precincts are reporting yet, so this may change. At any rate, he’s a long way from 4th or 5th place. (Update, midnight: Paul did place 2nd)
So, I’m somewhat annoyed to see to what lengths Fox News goes to avoid showing Ron Paul. Check this out, snapped this evening:
Notice in the bottom right corner that at the time this was shown Paul was in 3rd place. Now look at the three photographs.
These people disgust me. Incidentally, this sort of thing is why I never watch Fox News.
…But it’s all in the best interests of the American people because Glenn Beck on Fox News says Ron Paul supporters are a “domestic threat.”
Update, 11:30 pm: I just noticed that the New York Times doesn’t even show Dr. Paul as a candidate. Even in their online coverage. How can people roll their eyes when I say the media’s snubbing him?
4 Comments so far
Leave a reply
Where to even start?
Fox news plays the role of mouthpiece to a small-minded and manipulative corporation to the hilt, as per usual. It concerns me more that the New York Times is also playing this game — although note that if you go to the NYT website and search for articles about Ron Paul, they are, of course, including him in news stories about the Nevada results.
Second place in Nevada for Paul sounds really good, but 14% compared to Romney’s 51% is a pretty distant finish. Still, is heartening that his support beat out Huckabee and other worrisome candidates.
Also. This is why too much media conglomeration is a bad thing.
Honestly, I don’t know why they don’t cover him more; he’s running for the Republican nomination just like all the other ones are. Giuliani get more coverage than Ron Paul and has been doing worse of late. However, you must balance his lack of coverage against the fact that mainstream news organizations are incredibly terrible at perceiving major historical events as they happen. Karl Von Clausewitz in the late 18th century against the backdrop of Napoleon’s conquest of Europe wrote of having faith in his country and not believing the “words of a mendacious newspaper” in his essay “I Believe and Profess”, which tells you that this sort of incompetence is fairly standard and has been for quite a while. Fast forward a bit, and you hit the notably well documented example of the Spanish-American War, during which one William Hearst is famously credited with the quote, “You furnish the pictures and I’ll furnish the war,” to artist Frederic Remington. Look into the modern day, and you notice a suspicious pattern to current war coverage in Iraq and Afghanistan: it tends to go away when the bad news goes away.
In financial matters, I’m personally convinced it’s even worse: new sources first see what the market does, and then they actually MAKE UP reasons to explain why the market did what it did. There is no rhyme, reason, or consistency, just today’s rationalization.
In conclusion, Ron Paul’s lack of coverage means very little IMO. I think that he stands a reasonably good chance of becoming President IF the economic conditions continue to deteriorate, and I firmly believe that will happen. Stagflation will occur, and all of a sudden everyone will start looking for a man with a plan to stop it, and they are going to run smack across Ron Paul who’s been talking about monetary policy and sounding the warning on inflation since day one. Other candidates will try to play catch up, but they will not be able to beat Ron Paul on the issue since he can point to the record on how long he’s been talking about it. And if Paul runs as a 3rd party candidate, which looks more likely every day, we may end up seeing a political realignment with one of the two establishment parties getting the boot. Personally, with Thompson now out, I’m voting Paul if Romney can’t make the nomination for the Republican party. McCain and Huckabee aren’t really all that much different from Obama and Hillary IMO, and I’m not voting for THAT.
The mainstream mass media are clueless, and always have been throughout history when it comes to getting things right, and that doesn’t cover when they are being deliberately, actively misleading to sell ratings, personal pet policies, and newspapers. No worries, they’ll glom onto Ron Paul when he’s about to win. What do you expect from professional ghouls and vultures anyway?
Pug is dead?
Pug is dead. LONG LIVE PUG!