Rasmussen Reports gives us the answer: almost half.
A full 49% of voters believe that the MSM is actively trying to help Obama win in November, and increase of 5% from a month ago. Some other interesting tidbits include the fact that only 14% think the MSM will try to help McCain win, and that only 24% of Americans think most reporters even attempt to provide unbiased coverage.
It's also interesting to note that general support of the MSM falls neatly into party lines, with Democrats much more in favor (or thinking favorably about unbiased reporting) of the MSM than Republicans. Reps are much more likely to take campaign advice from friends and family than the MSM, but Dems are not.
Powerline predicts that this backlash will only grow, becoming a rebellion against the MSM by November.
Now, the really interesting part is that this survey was taken before the latest kerfuffle between McCain, Obama, and the New York Times.
Several days ago, the NYT published an op-ed piece by Barack Obama about his plan for Iraq (it was roundly criticized as being naive and based on false premises, in part because he wrote it before going over to the Middle East to see the situation for himself). Now, just days later, the NYT has rejected an op-ed submitted by McCain refuting many of the points made by Obama. They even went so far as to suggest that McCain redo his op-ed to be more like Obama's:
'It would be terrific to have an article from Senator McCain that mirrors Senator Obama's piece,' NYT Op-Ed editor David Shipley explained in an email late Friday to McCain's staff. 'I'm not going to be able to accept this piece as currently written.'They are, of course, spinning it madly now, saying that they wanted more of a forward-looking plan rather than a rebuttal. Still, take a look at some of the excerpts made by McCain that the NYT didn't want to publish:
'I am dismayed that he never talks about winning the war—only of ending it... if we don't win the war, our enemies will. A triumph for the terrorists would be a disaster for us. That is something I will not allow to happen as president.'Go to the link for the full text. It's good stuff! It clearly shows the policy difference between the two candidates, and it does contain plenty of forecasting about how McCain would conduct his Iraq policy if he wins the White House. As such, it seems clear that this rejection -- especially in conjunction with the excessive and extremely unbalanced coverage of Obama's trip to the Middle East -- is simply a manifestation of the fact that the MSM is pulling hard for Obama and willing to do anything to see him beat McCain.
'Progress has been due primarily to an increase in the number of troops and a change in their strategy. I was an early advocate of the surge at a time when it had few supporters in Washington. Senator Barack Obama was an equally vocal opponent. 'I am not persuaded that 20,000 additional troops in Iraq is going to solve the sectarian violence there,' he said on January 10, 2007. 'In fact, I think it will do the reverse.'
Senator Obama has said that he would consult our commanders on the ground and Iraqi leaders, but he did no such thing before releasing his “plan for Iraq.” Perhaps that’s because he doesn’t want to hear what they have to say.
I've seen lots of analysis on this situation already, but the general consensus is pretty clear. First, if the NYT had just published the op-ed, relatively few people would have seen it, and it would have gone largely unnoticed by the American people. Now, however, a scandalous atmosphere has been generated, and many more people will hear about it. Second, the worst thing (for Obama and the MSM) is that it most certainly will seem unfair and slanted to most Americans, ultimately doing more damage in rejection than it ever would have in print.
Michelle Malkin, in particular, reminds us that the liberal media -- despite what John McCain thinks and says -- are not his friends.
Let's hope McCain gets the message this time.
There's my two cents.
No comments:
Post a Comment