'He's Just...Erased': PBS 2020 Segment Finds Time for Klobuchar, Sestak, and Bullock--But Completely

[Uncle Joe]

Bernie Sanders

A Monday night PBS NewsHour segment on the state of the 2020 Democratic presidential primary highlighted Sen. Amy Klobuchar's new ad campaign in Iowa, the departure of marginal candidates Steve Bullock and Joe Sestak, a tender campaign moment with Sen. Elizabeth Warren, and Joe Biden's "No Malarkey" bus tour—but did not once even mention Sen. Bernie Sanders despite recent key endorsements and a surge in the polls.

(snip)

"Remember that Sanders has been #1 in two out of three recent New Hampshire polls, and is currently second in Iowa, ahead of 'frontrunner' Joe Biden," Robinson noted. "Alcindor found time to talk about Joe Sestak and Steve Bullock, plus plenty of candidates struggling to get out of single-digit poll numbers. And yet: not even a photo of Bernie Sanders. Incredible. He's just... erased. He's gone. Bernie who?"

(snip)

"MSNBC, of course, is hardly the only culprit," Savage noted. "As Katie Halper documented a few months ago, the New York Times reporter assigned to cover his campaign 'consistently paints a negative picture of Sanders' temperament, history, policies, and political prospects.' The Washington Post once famously ran sixteen negative stories about Sanders in the same number of hours."

(snip)

"Some 2020 presidential candidates have been embracing or acknowledging movement politics. But only one of them has been doing it for decades," the group said in a statement. "That's why Iowa CCI Action is endorsing Bernie Sanders. We're standing with Bernie because Bernie stands with us."

https://www.commondreams.org/news/2019/12/03/hes-justerased-pbs-2020-segment-finds-time-klobuchar-sestak-and-bullock-completely

Can you say....cowards?




I knew you could.

[TidalWave46]

1. WTF is this author smoking?

"and a surge in the polls."

[Uncle Joe]

3. Nothing, the corporate media conglomerates have been bogarting all of it. n/t

[TidalWave46]

8. They seem to also be tricking Sanders supporters into thinking he is surging. NT

[NurseJackie]

14. ...

[oldsoftie]

18. Ditto!!

[Me.]

60. May I Join You...Again?

[George II]

21. RCP: Nov. 21 Sanders at 19.3%, Dec. 2 Sanders at 16.0%. What's the definition of "surging" again?

[Kurt V.]

29. Over months of polling is a trend. imo not exactly a surge but the visual is telling.

[George II]

35. Over months...okay......

Mar 1 - 20.5
Apr 1 - 22.1
May 1 - 19.4
Jun 1 - 16.5
Jul 1 - 17.0
Dec 2 - 16.0

What's the definition of "surging" again?

[Kurt V.]

42. agree. now do biden.

[George II]

44. Okay, but remember, no one is saying that Biden is "surging"...

Mar 1 - 30.5
Apr 1 - 30.3
May 1 - 32.8
Jun 1 - 35.0
Jul 1 - 29.9
Aug 1 - 32.0
Sep 1 - 30.5
Oct 1 - 27.2
Nov 1 - 26.7
Dec 2 - 27.0

Even more important is his lead on his closest rival - dead heat with Warren on Oct 8, +5.4 ahead of Warren on Nov 1, +11.0 ahead of Sanders on Dec 2.

[Kurt V.]

45. true. i said that too. thnx

[Cha]

55. Surging backwards?

[George II]

59. Egrus?

[obamanut2012]

48. lolz

[George II]

16. PBS is now part of the "corporate media conglomerates"?

[Uncle Joe]

25. No but they do get substantial funding from private foundations

(snip)

Foundations that have contributed to the PBS Foundation are: Adobe Foundation, Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, Anne Ray Foundation, Arthur Vining Davis Foundations, Atlantic Philanthropies, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Charles H. Revson Foundation, Ford Foundation, George Lucas Family Foundation, Grable Foundation, John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, John S. and James L. Knight Foundation, Kern Family Foundation, Newman’s Own Foundation, Orfalea Foundation, Skoll Foundation, and W. K. Kellogg Foundation.[13]

(snip)


https://www.influencewatch.org/non-profit/pbs-foundation/

[George II]

26. Give me a break - PBS has been known for DECADES for being as unbiased as any media outlet....

Just in case that's not believed:

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/pbs-news-hour/

[Uncle Joe]

28. I enjoy PBS, particularly the News Hour, first started viewing when it was named

The MacNeil/Lehrer Report but they do operate within the status quo box, a moderate Republican against a moderate Democrat as their chief pundits.

[George II]

33. So you're saying PBS is biased?

[Uncle Joe]

37. Yes toward the status quo and the status quo is what gave us Trump.

[George II]

38. No one has yet to give a true definition of "status quo".

[Uncle Joe]

43. My definition of status quo is a rough equalization between the Republican and Democratic Parties

an almost 50/50 sharing of power, all that boils down to is gridlock and in the long run it only benefits the Republicans because the status quo ignores too many critical issues while leaving far too many Americans behind, disenfranchised and/or dis-empowered.

[George II]

47. That's not even close to the true definition of "status quo", in fact it's not a definition at all.

"Status quo" is a snapshot in time and is constantly changing - politically speaking when Obama took office "status quo" was a Democratic President and majorities in both the House and Senate. In 2016 the "status quo" was a republican president and majorities in both the House and the Senate.

[Uncle Joe]

49. And when both parties were in power, the minority party had just enough power to

maintain the status quo which has been in existence since the days of Reagan.

The rich got richer, the poor got poorer, climate change continued without major addressing or alteration, health care in the U.S. is still based on profit not actual health, our infrastructure has continued to decline over decades and through it all corporate supremacy has reigned supreme over the public good.

[LanternWaste]

67. So the rich got richer, eh? Not just the 1% as artificially constructed elsewhere?

The entire gamut of the the wealthy got richer?

Pretty much, yes. I would certainly agree.

Those advance book deals help out a lot in getting richer, I'd guess. Hey, but it's only $750,000... chicken feed, amiright?

[Uncle Joe]

70. "Forest and the trees" as I stated before good luck with that. n/t

[LanternWaste]

66. And the status quo also published Sanders' book.

(might need a truck to move the goalposts at this point)

[jberryhill]

53. They spent years accepting sponsorship by the letter J and the number 5

[littlemissmartypants]

64. ...

[Kurt V.]

31. times have changed and times are strange.

here i come but i ain't the same. ozzy Osborne. lol.

[Kurt V.]

30. uh yeah.

[LanternWaste]

65. Does this 'corporate media' include publishing companies?

For example, Macmillan Publishing who payed out three-quarters of a million dollars as an advance book deal (more precisely, $795,000)?






(space provided below to move goalposts...)

[Uncle Joe]

68. Here is a list of corporate media conglomerates

Concentration of media ownership (also known as media consolidation or media convergence) is a process whereby progressively fewer individuals or organizations control increasing shares of the mass media.[1] Contemporary research demonstrates increasing levels of consolidation, with many media industries already highly concentrated and dominated by a very small number of firms.[2][3]

Globally, large media conglomerates include Bertelsmann, National Amusements (Viacom Inc. and CBS Corporation), Sony Corporation, News Corp, Comcast, The Walt Disney Company, AT&T Inc., Fox Corporation, Hearst Communications, MGM Holdings Inc., Grupo Globo (South America) and Lagardère Group.[4][5][6]

As of 2018, the largest media conglomerates in terms of revenue rank Comcast, The Walt Disney Company, AT&T, CBS Corporation and Viacom per Forbes.

(snip)

An oligopoly is when a few firms dominate a market.[8] When the larger scale media companies buy out the more smaller-scaled or local companies they become more powerful within the market. As they continue to eliminate their business competition through buyouts or forcing them out (because they lack the resources or finances) the companies left dominate the media industry and create a media oligopoly.[7]

(snip)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concentration_of_media_ownership

Macmillan is owned by Holtzbrinck Publishing Group and they're not owned by one of the five corporate media conglomerates; which own 90% of U.S. media.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holtzbrinck_Publishing_Group

[Kurt V.]

2. That was pretty surreal.

[JustAnotherGen]

4. Nothing on

Buttigieg, Booker, Steyer, Yang or Castro either? Just those three?

They (the media) won't always have room for every candidate. At this point - Sanders has name recognition and seems to be dodging any and all scrutiny and nitpicking by the media. That could be a bad thing - or a good thing. The less out of the limelight the better it might be a for a candidate right now.

The media is attacking every single democratic candidate every day. If it's a day where your candidate is not being nitpicked by them - breathe a sigh of relief.

[brooklynite]

5. Shame! How is an obscure candidate like Sanders going to get known?

With some more press coverage he might actually break into the top tier of candidates!!!

[NurseJackie]

17. ...

If only he had name recognition!

[TidalWave46]

6. PBS

All PBS. Including the News Hour. Not just a mention, an interview. All in this election cycle. Dozens of more PBS videos out there. That includes mentions of Sanders on the News Hour in a positive way and two interviews with him on the News Hour.

[George II]

9. OH NO, say it ain't so! But they didn't mention him LAST night! They "erased him"!!!

[TidalWave46]

10. This author is one of the ones who was pushing that Obama was going to bring Sanders down.

Shocking where some people go to get their news. It does help in understanding their worldview.

[Cha]

56. GONE! Just like that!

[Uncle Joe]

12. Right after his heart attack, Bernie's Israeli/Palestinian speech and AOC's endorsement

which was back on October 19th but nothing in yesterday's segment when they were talking about the actual race in the homestretch Democratic primaries and nothing about his major endorsement from the largest progressive group in Iowa.

[TidalWave46]

15. After his heart attack, before his heart attack, different types of events, interviews.

"but nothing in yesterday's segment"



Next you will tell me he is surging in the polls!

[NurseJackie]

19. "Next you will tell me he is surging in the polls! "

Next you will tell me he is surging in the polls!

[oldsoftie]

20. Stop it. You're killing me!

[George II]

23. 16 candidates, 3 mentioned. I don't see 12 others complaining about being "erased", did I miss it?

[TidalWave46]

62. In all seriousness, people understood history better...

People like Trump and Sanders would never get off the ground. When a politician comes along espousing populist rhetoric and attacking the free press you run like hell from that person. It is a cornerstone of two current campaigns for the Presidency. Trump and Sanders. I am so glad that Sanders isn’t gaining traction. Such rhetoric almost always ends in disaster if the person can bullshit enough people to get them the win.

[betsuni]

61. But but but ... CORPORATE MEDIA CONGLOMERATES!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[George II]

7. It's a conspiracy! So when does PBS get characterized as part of the "Main $tream Media"? C'mon...

....Joe, Sanders has gotten more attention on MSNBC, CNN, AND PBS than anyone recently. So PBS didn't mention him LAST NIGHT. Remember last night there were 16 candidates, they couldn't mention EVERY one.

Just another commondreams screed.

[NurseJackie]

40. Desperation. Fear.

Just another commondreams screed.

Desperation. Fear.

[msongs]

11. poor bernie, completely erased. nt

[NurseJackie]

39. I've heard that it's the lack of name recognition that's holding him back.

Supposebly.

[George II]

57. Yeah but, I got two emails from him this morning. I guess he's not completely erased.

[TexasTowelie]

13. Has Bernie actually done anything that is newsworthy?

Bernie said his campaign would slow down after the heart attack. If he isn't doing anything in public, then why should we expect the media to report about it?

I don't see the media acting cowardly, but I do hear a lot of cries of "wolf."

[NurseJackie]

36. The writing is on the wall... BS will not be our party's nominee, and they know it.

So, in a last ditch effort, they hope to bully various media outlets into unfairly giving him more coverage (to over-compensate against the false allegations?) or... in the event that the strategy fails, the campaign and his supporters hope to create a narrative to explain-away why it is that he's doing so poorly, and why it is that he's reached his ceiling, or why it is that his numbers decline (when looking at overall trends, rather than outlier oddball online polls.)

[tritsofme]

22. lol, this is laughable.

[roody]

24. No surprise here.

[NurseJackie]

34. Aw.

[Celerity]

27. Nathan J. Robinson, is a professional Democratic Party-basher who runs the far left rag

Current Affairs (Jacobin on the cheap n' dirty, specialising in smear jobs)

and writes shit like this

Superpredator: Bill Clinton's Use and Abuse of Black America

https://www.amazon.com/Superpredator-Clintons-Abuse-Black-America/dp/0692736891




and

Pelosi Must Go

It is not acceptable to have a party leader who portrays the progressive left as crazy.

Nathan J. Robinson

https://www.currentaffairs.org/2019/11/pelosi-must-go

I’m not going to mince words here. I think what Pelosi is doing is evil. I think it’s indefensible. It is hard enough fighting against corporate interests and the Republican Party without also having the leader of the Democratic Party portraying left ideas as ludicrous. The Green New Deal and single-payer healthcare are morally urgent. The people pushing them are serious, intelligent, and committed. Pelosi chooses to treat them as idiots. (“The green dream, or whatever they call it, nobody knows what it is, but they’re for it, right?”) She could remain neutral, she could avoid “punching left,” but she’s publicly attacking and undermining the progressive wing of the Democratic Party.

The Democratic Party has spent years failing to deliver for people. During that time, Nancy Pelosi was its leader in the House of Representatives. (Pelosi’s own San Francisco district is arguably the epicenter of the American inequality crisis.) If we are to have a new kind of politics, we desperately need new leadership.

[George II]

41. BOOM! Good research, thanks for that bit of reality.

[Celerity]

50. It comes from all the dodgy hit jobs from the far left internet on Pete that I have become familiar

with these smear merchants, unfortunately. Warren as well, Harris and Biden too, those 4 have been the most attacked by that end of the social media and their affiliated sites.



Robinson wrote an nasty early hit piece on Buttigieg 8 months back that was picked up by all the usual far left blogosphere and Sirota/TYT types. I had never heard of him before that. A now-banned troll posted it and multiple now-banned trolls kept sliding it into threads.

Robinson is still at it:

Link to tweet

I think it is extremely problematic that these Dem-bashers are posted here with impunity, but hey, that is just me.

[George II]

52. Imagine Nathan Robinson calling someone else a "con man"!

[JoeOtterbein]

32. K n R ! Thanks for posting!

[crazytown]

46. Marty: Looks like he's being erased; Doc: Erased from existence!

Your Campaign is Urgently Seeking a Donation of -

[George II]

51. Does 1.21 gigawatts convert to $27.00?

[BeckyDem]

58. They fear Bernie the most. Look what they're doing with Medicare for All.

So many lies, its sad.

[LanternWaste]

63. Blame the media, question the polls, rinse, lather, repeat as necessary.

"I knew you would..."

[MrsCoffee]

69. Better Believe It!

Redux!

[LesterT]

71. Heh.

They don't want it getting out that Bernie Sanders has far more support than the polling and media narrative show in this primary. A big surprise is in store for the marginalization faithful. They are scared shitless that their power to control the narrative could be coming to an end.