13 Comments | leave a comment | RSS 2.0 for this post | trackback |
| Wednesday, June 19, 2013 |
|
- A Bird's Eye View
- A Motley Vision
- Adventures in Mormonism
- Blognitive Dissonance
- Book of Mormon Blog
- By Common Consent
- Ethesis
- Face of the Other
- Faith Promoting Rumor
- Feminist Mormon Housewives
- Flooding the Earth With the Book of Mormon
- Golden Road to Samarqand
- Head Life
- Just Sayin'
- Juvenile Instructor
- Messanger & Advocate
- Millennial Star
- Mormon Matters
- Mormon Mommy Wars
- New Cool Thang
- Nine Moons
- Old Testament Blog
- Our Mother's Keeper
- Proud Daughter of Eve
- Segullah
- Sunstone Blog
- Times & Seasons
- Wheat and Tares
- Zelophehad's Daughters
A close race sells more papers. Obama was pulling away, hence… |
^^ exactly. |
a whole blog full of cynics here :) |
Note that I am not claiming any kind of conspiracy. It is entirely possible that each paper reached the same conclusion independently. |
You mean depicting him positively since his debate performance? They weren’t doing that before… What’s even more funny is the Christian media depicting this race as a choice between two evils, primarily because of Romney’s non-traditional, non-biblical religion. |
I have found the national media to be refreshingly positive as they discuss Mitt Romney. I’ve never seen them as positive about a Republican candidate before. I take Time magazine and noticed that immediately. They are fairly positive about the president, also, and I like Time’s emphasis on the issues and the even-handed way they’ve approached the topic. I applaud this move. Tiger, Time was doing it before. This week, they did a really good unbiased job of listing the lies and inaccuracies of each candidate’s statements. They note, with a bit of irony, the outrage each candidate expresses at the other’s duplicity. Which has also cracked me up. |
Jim Fallows had it exactly right: “…the political media’s iron law that ‘the story always changes’” is what’s driving a lot of this coverage. |
4. Last Lemming – I am not a conspiracy theorist either but it is quite remarkable… 5. Tiger – I saw an article in Time where they found some wacky evangelical who was talking about the lesser of two evils. 6. annegb – beyond Time, I don’t think any of the majors have been positive prior to the last two weeks. 7. Paul Robichaux – I like that… |
Last Lemming knows lemming behavior when (s)he sees it. |
I think Romney’s good debate performance and some tightening polls have led a lot of the media to say some more positive things than what they had been saying. Before that, the main story was how Romney was losing badly and even GOP loyalists were grumbling about the way he was handling the campaign. Time and some of the other big players have had stories with longer timelines that they had been working on for a while. Time always does in depth pieces on both candidates at this stage of the election. They usually focus on getting to know the candidate rather than trying to sayanything particularly positive or negative. I have been reading Time for 30 years and I can tell you they are pretty consistent this way. I don’t see anything very different in this election’s coverage other than the cover story a couple weeks ago which focused on how Romney’s faith affects his politics. It was called “The Mormon Identity” and was about the history of the Church as much as it was about Romney. It was pretty unique and I thought it was a very interesting piece. It basically concluded that the thing people see as “flip-flopping” in Romney is really just a pragmatism that comes from being a member of the Church. You can see the cover here: http://www.time.com/time/covers/0,16641,20121008,00.html I think you have to be a subscriber to read the whole article. |
Mcq, I think all politicians are pragmatists. Few admit it. That’s what I liked about Rick Santorum. Were they not, they wouldn’t be on the winning, or successful governance every damn time! They’re forced to posture perfection. I actually accidentally subscribed to Time, but I’m enjoying it. Newsweek is awful. Still, I feel most media has been pretty civil to Mitt Romney. They seem to respect him, despite his flaws. Paul Ryan, now, not so much. I can’t watch Fox news anymore. Can’t take the yellimg bias. They’re the worst, which is really sad becaise I started watching them with the Gore/Bush election and I felt good about them. Now I check Drudge and Huffington every morning and if they have the same story, I believe it. Their headlines are hilariously predictable, though. Huffington’s is “Romney Sucks” and Drudge is “No, Obama Sucks!” If I’m noticing this, a lot of other plain simple Americans are, too. Aside note: Obama’s love affair with Hollywood and the hubris of young and beautiful movie stars who think I need to be told how to vote is hypocritical and belies his assertion of being for common folk. Totally turns me off. |
The debate fianlly convinced many in media that Romney might/can/will win. So they are starting to posture and adjust their reporting so that they don’t look like total idiots if/when he does. They would look pretty stupid if they keep saying he can’t win, when he actually does. So part of it is that they have started to cover their butts for a possible Romney win, and part is that they are starting to suck up to Romney. |
But no one can trust Romney’s pragmatissm. There’s still a fear that he’s a radical rightie. |
