Accuracy in Media

On MSNBC’s Hardball this past Monday night, during a discussion of the new Obama campaign ad attacking Mitt Romney for his work at Bain Capital, host Chris Matthews asked Time’s Mark Halperin how Obama can effectively debate Romney on his financial dealings.

Halperin: I don’t think he needs to. I think he can—in a debate I think he can bumper sticker it and make it clear and again, the press—this is one of these instances where the press is very sympathetic to the Obama narrative on Bain and not all that sympathetic to Governor Romney. Governor Romney needs to make an argument so compelling that it finds an audience in the press, if he can do it, and an audience with the public. I think in the debate, again, we know what the president will say and I think he’d be pretty effective.  What will Governor Romney say in the debates, in the fall campaign at high profile moments? He had kind of a test run in the nomination fight, but he’s going to have to address it on a range of things.

Matthews then tried to rationalize the pro-Obama media bias by asking Halperin if it wasn’t due in part to private equity people making 20 or 30 times more money per year than newspaper people make.

Halperin responded quickly by saying, “Not necessarily what TV people make,”  causing Matthews to try to laugh it off, knowing full well that his estimated salary of $2 million is more than 60 times that of the average reporter’s salary, according to PayScale.

The admission of a pro-Obama bias, surprisingly coming from Halperin, only confirms what most Americans have known–the media have been in the tank for Obama since 2008 and even a poor economy and high jobless rate can’t dampen their enthusiasm.





Ready to fight back against media bias?
Join us by donating to AIM today.

Comments