Jon Stewart shows what I've been saying. The MEDIA chooses our candidates

@Taskr36 (13963)
United States
August 16, 2011 9:05pm CST
If you haven't seen this video you MUST watch it. I have been telling people for years that the media controls our elections. The media is what gave us Obama. The media is the reason most people can't even NAME the presidential candidates of 2008 besides Obama and McCain. Now we have a candidate who has won several straw polls, and recently came in 2nd in a straw poll considered to be one of the most important. Despite that, they refuse to even MENTION him while referring to candidates that rated far below him as "top tier". Jon Stewart is a comedian with a fake news show, and everything he says should be taken with a grain of salt, but now and then he really nails stories that the mainstream media buries. Please watch this. http://gawker.com/5831167/
3 people like this
9 responses
• United States
17 Aug 11
It's true. The media pretty much decides who the people should vote for. Even right now with everything that is going on in Iowa, it seems like the media is telling us, "here are the people running for this party, and the people running for this party, and now we think that you should vote for these people in these parties, and then once it's gone down to the final two, here is who we think you should all vote for." Also, I am probably like a lot people and sick of the two party system, and I, like most others, am probably wishing that I could vote for a third candidate, but sadly, if I do vote for the third candidate they might lose.
• United States
17 Aug 11
I love that quote from South Park by the way, and people don't give enough credit to that show because that show has more intelligence than people are willing to believe. Anyway, I agree with you. The two party system is failing. There is no bipartisanship and people are getting discouraged with government because of it, and Americans are suffering for it. We need solutions. The Healthcare Plan, for example, has some great ideas, but overall, it's not entirely sound. There are a few flaws in it. It's not a bad idea, it's poorly executed. The economy and the market, we need to stop buying things that we don't really need, and start paying off our debt, and we need to find more ways of keep jobs in this country and creating more jobs for me who live here. People need to start buying things that are actually made in America. Surprisingly, this will really help out the economy. We need to think of ideas and ways to boost the economy and not drive it further into the ground.
• United States
17 Aug 11
Right or wrong, the media can only reflect what it sees going on. If the media outlets start talking about a candidate being viable despite what political experts say THEN they are dictating who should run and who we should vote for. Yes the media is too powerful in influencing public opinion but it is only because we get what we want to see (collectively). A perfectly balanced, honest to the facts and non-sensationalist news program would not be watched. Why do so many people watch Jon Stewart in the first place? Because that show at least is intentionally trying to be funny instead of hiding the entertainment behind trumped up tension, misery or heart-string-pulling non-sense. Running for President is just a maxed out type of popularity contest anyway so of course the media is going to be way too influential. The only thing keeping Ron Paul's name in the conversation is popularity. Actual conversation of what it would mean to have him President is secondary.
1 person likes this
@bobmnu (8157)
• United States
17 Aug 11
Rep Ron Paul scares the liberals and the media. People are beginning to understand what his message is and they like what he has to say. If he is elected president and implements some of them the power base of Washington will be changed and many people will lose their jobs and influence over this country.
• United States
17 Aug 11
Yes, many people WILL lose their jobs if Ron Paul was President. Tanking the economy will never be easier than electing him.
1 person likes this
• Canada
17 Aug 11
My American husband and I have been talking about this, and it makes sense to us. Last night we were watching Cobert, and he was talking about how Ron Paul was 2 or 3 in the Iowa Straw Poll, but the media is totally ignoring him. My husband is a BIG Ron Paul supporter, and has been encouraging him to run for President for years. It would be nice if he had a fighting chance!!
1 person likes this
@Latrivia (2878)
• United States
17 Aug 11
My husband and I were actually talking about this tonight. They did that with him last election, too. If they didn't outright ignore him they wrote him off as the crazy uncle of the Republican family. I guess more people take him seriously now so more people are taking notice. I think that one reporter for CNN was actually trying to point out that they're covering people who aren't even running MORE than Ron Paul. Kudos to him for actually caring enough to say something.
@Taskr36 (13963)
• United States
17 Aug 11
The media won't "portray" him as the crazy uncle because the "crazy uncle" is the one you pretend doesn't exist. Every family has that family member and if you don't know who it is, YOU are that family member.
@Latrivia (2878)
• United States
17 Aug 11
He's the most conservative of the republican party. Truth be told he doesn't belong in the running for the Republican nomination, but he's tried the 3rd party route to no avail. I realize the mainstream media is by and large an rat race of idiots just trying to get the best viewership ratings regardless of how biased they may be, but this doesn't excuse their behavior. People already know how his party treats him, there's no point in the media reflecting that, other than to push their own agenda.
• United States
17 Aug 11
Maybe because he is a "crazy uncle" of the Republican Party? Since that's how the Party treats him, that's how the media will portray him.
1 person likes this
@matersfish (6306)
• United States
17 Aug 11
It would be nice if we could go back to a time when media presented things fairly without ever playing favorites. But I'm not even sure that time ever existed. It seems more reasonable that media has always existed in America to effect change. I could be wrong, but I don't think anyone goes into media wanting to relay messages to the people. They go into media wanting to relay selective messages to the people. The human element is just too strong here. Media's always going to be a change agent. But, I guess, at least we have multiple options in America, and at least most of us can find different sources for our news. As we all know, many in government want to outright control news, John "I'm a Bonehead" Kerry being the latest national example of foot-in-mouth, we-know-what's-best, ironfisted, Cuba-longing schmuckazoid, control-freak. The video won't load, but since it was Stewart, I'm sure I can find it elsewhere on a more Comcast-friendly flv player.
@Taskr36 (13963)
• United States
17 Aug 11
Sadly the media has a long history of playing favorites and that even goes back to the days when newspapers were the primary media outlet. It's just gotten so much worse in recent years. The Rat is right, there are always politicians who want to control the media. You'll see it a lot with older politicians who actually remember the old days when media was largely controlled by government and could delude people into believing government propaganda. Hopefully this youtube video will work. It's too good to miss. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3EY5Ofcxjs0
• United States
17 Aug 11
That was panic about Kerry? Hardly. Government taking control of media isn't something I worry about. I know they'll never shut down the Internet. And I know many networks and papers would never give in to government's will. The closest it's ever going to come is a shillathon like we have now with MSNBC, NPR, the New York Times and a few other sources. And they're only worrisome with their idols hold office. They simply do the bidding to play along. And as far as throwing him under the bus, he's simply the latest politician I've seen on camera telling media what they should and shouldn't be talking about.
• United States
17 Aug 11
Good call. You won't find a time when the media did not hugely affect elections and campaigning. There certainly is more media now then ever before and less concern for getting a story right before "going to press", but the impact on American public opinion has been fairly constant. Nice job of throwing Kerry under the bus on your way out. I don't think your panic over someone in government wanting to control the media is very realistic (except in the way that ALL politicians would love to have positive press all the time) but it's always fun to pick on Kerry.
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
17 Aug 11
Well, they try and sometimes they are successful, but my experience has shown it's not that often.
@Taskr36 (13963)
• United States
17 Aug 11
Well the media was what made the 2008 election a Hillary vs Obama race and it was the media who elected Obama for us while destroying Sarah Palin. There was almost no doubt that a democrat would win in 2008, but there's no way a half-term senator with a record of associating with racists and a terrorist leader would have been the chosen candidate without the media putting him on the forefront.
@debrakcarey (19887)
• United States
18 Aug 11
This is what happens when people do not think for themselves. I've heard people say that they don't have time to pay attention to the debates and research the candidates; so they get what is fed to them by the MSM. I am not a Ron Paul supporter, but I too have wondered why he and Herman Cain and Rick Santorum and yes, even good old Newt do not get the coverage they deserve. Even FOX News treats them as a side show to the top three media darlings. My suggestion is spend at least 30 minutes a day researching ALL of them before the primaries. Even if you don't like them initialy, take the time to follow them through the entire campaign. AND, listen and read on more than one news network. This is vitally important, get more than ONE opinion.
@JodeneB (177)
• United States
17 Aug 11
Yeah & thank you Jon Stewart! I've been staying away from the mass media for years! Really hard to do, but no tv helps! The highest bidder gets their info shown to the brain washed public. I think it's about time the public wakes up more. It was the same thing with the last election - Ron Paul was rarely invited to the debates & when he was, the edited it to make him look stupid. I saw a short video someone made after Obama won the election....the interviewer asked some people who voted for him important questions such as what platform he ran with, how he believes on main issues, who his running man was, what state he was senator of etc. Most people didn't know the answers!!! they knew that "obama means change, and sarah palin spent a lot of money on her wardrobe". They knew what they were fed from the television! Thanks for posting!