Surprise! LAT Finds Media Treating McCain, Obama Similarly


At least, that's what James Rainey would like you to believe.

Further review of Rainey's piece shows that the examples he highlights of supposedly equal and fawning treatment of John McCain and Barack Obama is not so equal.

In fact, so ridiculous are the comparisons, I thought for a moment  the joke was on me--that Rainey's piece was a send-up of local media, a SNL-style parody.

But there's no joke here. That is, none that were intentional.

Story Continues Below Ad ↓

Example #1: 

Famine for media's big names became a small feast for the likes of local newspapers such as the Black Hills Pioneer, which recently offered an uncritical account of McCain’s appearance at the Sturgis Motorcycle Rally, the giant annual event in South Dakota.

In the weekly paper's story, McCain's bus was "famed" and his support of veterans [sic] benefits went unchallenged (though the story did mention opponents' rally on the issue).

Can anyone imagine a critical account of a candidate's visit to a motorcycle rally?  Perhaps this: "McCain after all didn't seem to have worn a leather jacket at the rally. Horrors!"

And what more could the reporter have done than to report in--as we wish his cohorts in the big-time, national, MSM would do--a 'just the facts please, ma'am' style? Poor Tom Lawrence of the Black Hills Pioneer mentioned the 'opponents's rally.' What more would Rainey have him do?

Barack Obama may be a rock star, but at least John McCain's bus is "famed."

This wasn't the only "free pass" offered John McCain last week by weak local media. Example #2: 

In Philadelphia, an account by Fox 29 News offered McCain an even friendlier platform. Its reporter recounted the candidate's stop in the suburbs and assured viewers there was "every indication" the Republican would be a "regular visitor" to the area.

The reporter's biggest favor, however, came when he set up a months-old clip of Obama saying that "bitter" rural Pennsylvania voters sometimes turned to guns and religion for solace. Then the reporter asked McCain to tee off.

The Republican wasted no time, surprise, assuring viewers he understood that Americans who supported churches and the 2nd Amendment were not cynical but "decent, good, honest, wonderful people who love their country and cherish the Constitution of the United States."

Saying that John McCain would be a frequent visitor to Pennsylvania--a fairly benign observation, given its status as a battleground state--is what passes for doing the candidate a favor.

As though that weren't enough, Fox News 29 asked McCain about Obama's "bitter" comment. As it was a statement made to Obama supporters in San Francisco about rural Pennsylvanians (among others), one can understand Fox News 29's interest in finding out what McCain had to say about the matter.

The Obama examples? Besides the fact that Rainey provides no links, they don't even compare to the weak ones that supposedly illustrated the cushy ride given to McCain by local press. For the most part, they mirror their fawning MSM compatriots and bring to mind aforementioned SNL skits from earlier this year.

A reporter at WFMJ-TV in Youngstown, Ohio, compared the Democrat's rally appearance to "a champ standing victorious in the political ring" and signed off: "Sen. Obama's run for president has the world witnessing history." 

Does this compare to saying McCain's bus is "famed?"

But that's not all:

Not to be outdone, a correspondent for the NBC affiliate in Cleveland seemed almost as thrilled by Obama's stop at a fruit stand as a teenage girl there who told the reporter it was . . . "Crazy!"

A video on the WKYC website shows him using the start of his five-minute interview with Obama to tell the candidate that hislast [sic] two comments at a town hall were "knock-out-of-the-park fantastic for ya."

Obama seemed to enjoy the interview.

Does this match the Fox Philly reporter's observation that, in fact, "there was 'every indication' the Republican would be a 'regular visitor?'"

Of course Obama enjoyed the interview. It's one thing for Fox Philly to ask John McCain about Obama's "bitter" comment and a whole other if they had responded after his answer, as WKYC did to Obama, that his response was "knock-out-of-the-park fantastic for ya."

Rainey's only example of tough candidate treatment by local media was, predictably, of John McCain. 

Not all local interviewers are so unctuous. Take Chad Livengood, who encountered McCain at a June rally in Missouri.

The Springfield News-Leader statehouse reporter heard McCain tout his plan for a gas tax holiday, then concede afterward, in another one of those short interviews, that the proposal had very little chance of making it through Congress.

"He was promising it up on the stage, but behind the scenes he was admitting it wouldn't go anywhere," the 25-year-old reporter said.

So Livengood let his readers know about the discrepancy. And his story described how some economists doubted the tax cut would make a significant difference.

Sometimes campaigns dial for dummies and end up reaching sharpies.

(Note: Here again, Rainey links to the McCain example. No Obama links.)

Rainey's report on local media comes against the polling backdrop of a public less and less inclined to believe in the impartiality of the press. This piece in the LAT confirms their suspicions. The wider public can read, as we have done, and see that, indeed, there is a striking difference between how the press responds to McCain versus how it responds to Obama. Rainey's attempts to show equivalence between the two only serve to accentuate the difference and eliminate every last shred of credibility.

Rather than showing that media coverage of the two candidates is fair and even handed, Rainey's examples highlight, once again, the vast gulf that separates the way the press treats McCain and Obama.

Part of me feels bad for Rainey.

After turning on the TV and quickly jotting down the comments of a few Obama groupies (Members of the Press), Rainey then had to search for hours to find a couple of really tenuous McCain examples.

That's hard work.

—Jacob S. Lybbert is an editorial associate at NewsBusters.


Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

The MSM fawned all over McCain.

And that bit of subterfuge lasted right up until they were sure they had managed to install him as the republican nominee.

-Dave.

We are not going to save this country by being polite to those who are working tirelessly (and succeeding right handily) at destroying it.

Damn Skippy! And McCain

Damn Skippy! And McCain was too self-absorbed and gullible to see it coming. He thought "They like me! They really like me!"

Uh, no, Senator. Now you get to see who they really like.

And regarding Rainey's comparison, I guess in his world, calling Obama's performance"knock out of
the park fantastic" and not blatantly insulting McCain, are considered
"equal treatment."

MB, the truly sad thing is, McCain still hasn't figured it out.

And we are now less than three months from the election.

-Dave.

Reading that post shows me

Reading that post shows me that more and more we are slipping into so much minutiae of this discussion that some can no longer see any sign of the big picture.  The issue with coverage of McCain vs. Obama is not the number of positive adjectives one candidate gets, or how many hipsters they can get to say "this is crazy!"  The issue is what are the issues being discussed.

The MSM has been all over the Wright story, the fistbump story, the Whitey Video story, the Proud story, the flagpin story, etc., but they are nowhere to found on the "Obama supports every far left liberal position story", which is the only one that really matters.  Republican pundits are getting their panties in a bunch over these stupid, inane, and meaningless trivia items and letting the real story pass them by.  Why? For McCain, why is the media being dead silent on Keating Five, McCain's conduct as a POW, McCain's drive to restore relations with Vietnam for the benefit of Anheuser-Busch?  These are all major stories, yet the MSM is staying mum about them.  Why?  Those are the descrepencies in coverage that should be getting discussed, not how the MSM defines McCain's bus.

James Rainey should look in his own paper for the bias..

James Rainey (about as liberally biased as they come) should look in his own paper for the bias.. the daily grind on the Republicans and McCain, and the daily fawining over Obama.

If the piece is not an out and out hit on McCain, it's likely to be one digging up some obscure divide amongst conservatives, Christians, small townsfolk, or hunters, lilke today's "GOP Support - Obama fans and proud of it, or on how pastor Rick Warren is making the far right, "far from happy."

If the piece is about Obama, it's almost always to be.. well, nothing less than fawning pieces with warm and fuzzy pictures of either Obama or his fans. And when it appears that a LA Times journalist is touching on the art of criticism in a piece on Obama, a closer look usually reveals that it was written from the journalist's heart, with the hope that someone in the Obama camp gets the word to him to walk the line - the line that the LA Times journalists want him to stay on, or left of.