Press Watch: Why is MSM so gentle with Joe Biden?

[Fiendish Thingy]

This is a delicate topic, but an important one for an honest vetting of our potential nominees.

https://presswatchers.org/2020/01/why-is-the-mainstream-media-so-gentle-to-joe-biden/

T The two most important roles for journalists during political primary season are to cull the herd of the weakest candidates and take their best shots at the frontrunner, to test his or her readiness for the general election. That's a public service for the political ecosystem.

So a profoundly weak frontrunner should be the ultimate in big game for our top political reporters.

Instead, mainstream journalists in the best positions to demand answers — during sit-down interviews and televised debates — have been remarkably gentle with Joe Biden.

They ask about his decision to authorize the war in Iraq, but not about the many documented times he has lied about why he made that decision, and when he first realized the war was a mistake.

They ask questions about his fitness for office, but let him off with glib answers about push-ups rather than assertively confronting him with examples of his consistent and troubling incoherence — even when he is in the process of giving them fresh examples.

About Press Watch:

We’re entering a critical period in American politics and American political journalism is not up to the task. Donald Trump’s campaign and presidency have exposed and exploited chronic weaknesses like never before. And despite some progress, elite political press coverage insufficiently rebuts lies; normalizes abnormal behavior; asserts false equivalences; remains overly susceptible to spectacle, conflict, and gamesmanship; fails to contextualize the news with expertise – and on and on.

(Note to potential jurors: this is legitimate, evidence based criticism of both Biden and the media, not “bashing”, Thank You).

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

1. Whoever's ox is being gored at a particular time

will complain that their opponent's ox isn't being gored enough. FWIW, the author of this piece, Daniel Froomkin, was fired by the Washington Post and until recently worked for The Intercept. Whether he is an objective commentator is for the reader to consider.

[Hortensis]

2. No, it isn't. The same RW machine as 2016 is busily trying

to keep Republicans in power and add more and defeat Democrats. This includes the NYT's editor in chief, Dean Baquet, who, revealingly, was not removed by his bosses in spite of blatantly working all through 2014-2016 to subvert the 2016 election and bringing scandal to the NYT, and those at the AP, who also got away with election murder in 2016 and are still at it. And many more, including the continued anti-Democratic agendas at MSNBC and CNN.

Most of our MSM belong to one of 7 giant business interests, and corruption has become rampant. To vote smart we have to know these things.

[Fiendish Thingy]

9. Press Watch has plenty of criticism for all the media hacks who carry water for Trump

Or those simply don’t do their jobs and hold those in power accountable.

I encourage you to visit the site to see all the hack journos they rake over the coals, including some of those you have mentioned.

[Demsrule86]

17. First of all this is a Salon article...and that is the home of HA Goodman...and Salon is very

anti-Democratic so I don't agree with you. So I don't really care about Press watch...I don't get my news from any source these days as most are anti-Democratic...I read everything and based on facts make up my own mind...I rarely watch MSNBC these days as they treat Biden like shit for months.

[still_one]

21. +++

[Demsrule86]

24. Thank you.

[PatSeg]

27. And actually MSNBC

isn't necessarily "gentle" with Biden, they are more inclined to ignore him or be dismissive of him. If there isn't some scandal or outrage, they can't be bothered. Most of what press Biden is getting is only because of the whole Trump-Ukrainian story.

And then there is the fact that Joe has been around for a long time. There isn't really much about him that isn't already known. His life is an open book, not much to uncover or reveal.

[Demsrule86]

51. Exactly, this is why he is the perfect nominee...was VP for a popular Democratic president. He is

well known and can't be demonized easily by the right wing, he will be a great president and Trump fears him so much he committed treason to manufacture dirt on Biden...and now is impeached...and disgraced for all time.

[PatSeg]

59. Yep, Trump showed his cards

He is terrible at this sort of thing. Also if you want to create a scandal about someone, you need to create one that is believable. The possibility that anyone, anywhere will find some dark shocking story of corruption about Joe Biden is ludicrous. And because Biden is well known both nationwide and worldwide, it will be hard to make people believe such rumors.

Once again, it will only appeal to Trump's base and they weren't ever going to vote for Biden anyway. His followers know he lies and they don't care.

[Demsrule86]

61. Exactly and Trump is in trouble based on the mid terms as well.

[Thekaspervote]

28. Indeed!!

[Demsrule86]

50. Salon has no credibility after what they did in 16.

[Hortensis]

18. Is that all it takes? If they criticize Trump they must be

good guys? By that measure, Chuck Todd's a LW hero.

Please remember all the press coverage to date. As the Democratic leader for months before he even announced, practically the only candidate in the race on both sides, Biden's been THE big target for the media. Besides that, he's the Democrat who MUST be defeated to protect the venal interests of most of their employers.

If that's not enough, political media always attack the "same-old" candidates they've covered for years as boring (they always are to them!) and try to pump up shiny new candidates as exciting to create a race. How about the blizzard of dishonest and negative coverage over the past year on how old, boring, hopelessly out of touch, unexciting, corrupt, creepy, senile, conservative, and unelectable Biden is? The energy invested in that has undoubtedly sped up global warming all by itself.

[getagrip_already]

3. I don't care who you are - that's funny!

Just google his name and look at the headlines. You call that going easy? lol.

[The Valley Below]

4. Trash source.

[Gothmog]

5. LOL

Is this another medial blackout myth. I am still waiting for proof that the so-called Bernie blackout was real. That myth did not work and so the sanders campaign has evidently moved on.

You do know that trump is being impeached because trump was scared of Biden and the trump has spent $10 million attacking Joe?

I love this Biden ad

Link to tweet

[Thekaspervote]

29. Great ad!! Directed at our foe...all candidates should be pushing against dotard, not each other

[Rorey]

36. This

The attacks on "each other" are a real turn off to me. (And especially so when/if they go on after our candidate is chosen.)

[PatSeg]

30. You know what is really funny?

Trump has given Joe Biden so much free publicity. The more he talks about Biden, the more he puts his name out there and the only people who believe Trump's BS are people who would never vote for a Democrat anyway. He is the gift that keeps on giving and he doesn't know how to keep his mouth shut.

[Demsrule86]

6. They have been after Biden since before he entered the race...there really is no there there...

everyone knows he voted for the war so...either it is a deal breaker or not...I don't care and based on polls, I doubt many do...you do know that the GOP wants to run against Sanders right? Hewitt will vote for Sanders in the Dem primary in Virginian and Trump in the election...he said so today.

[MineralMan]

7. From that website's About page

The project lead
Dan Froomkin is a trailblazer in the area of online accountability journalism with 21 years of experience building, editing and contributing to websites including the Huffington Post, The Intercept, and the Nieman Foundation’s Watchdog Project. Over 12 years at the Washington Post, he served as Editor of the website and wrote its enormously popular White House Watch column, which aggregated and amplified insightful political coverage. He has taught online journalism at the Poynter Institute and the American University Graduate School of Communication.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

10. What this doesn't mention is that the Washington Post fired him.

[MineralMan]

14. Yes. I added info from the Wikipedia page on him, below.

[George II]

8. Mr. Froomkin hasn't been paying much attention to the "mainstream media". He's clearly wrong.

[Fiendish Thingy]

15. Feel free to refute the Extensive evidence in his article.

I encourage you to post examples of the non-Fox media questioning Biden’s fitness for office or even just pushing back on his glib, often incoherent answers - I haven’t seen it.

[Demsrule86]

20. Please there is a reason why I stopped watching MSNBC and CNN...after every debate, any rally

everyday they were after Biden...now they are forced to acknowledge he is the front runner...they have called him racist, war monger, and all sort of shit.

[Fiendish Thingy]

40. I have never heard MSNBC call Biden a racist or a warmonger

Certainly not their anchors, or their guests.

Morning Joe is particularly pro-Joe.

[Demsrule86]

47. I used to watch Morning Joe and they were very anti-Biden...particularly Mika...still are.

[MineralMan]

22. There is no such evidence.

It's all bullshit opinion. You should self-delete this hugely biased material.

[Submariner]

11. What Russian shithole did this crap ooze out of

Everyday more horseshit....

[MineralMan]

12. About Dan Froomkin, Who IS That Website

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

Dan Froomkin is an independent journalist. He was a senior writer and Washington editor for The Intercept

Firing from the Washington Post
On June 18, 2009, it was reported that Froomkin was being fired by the Washington Post.[9][10] Froomkin confirmed this in a June 19 entry on White House Watch: "As Washington Post ombudsman Andy Alexander and others reported yesterday, The Washington Post has terminated my contract. So sometime in late June or early July, I'll be writing my last blog post here."[11]

Froomkin was almost immediately hired by the Huffington Post, where he continued his previous column. His last original column for that publication was September 25, 2013.

He joined The Intercept on September 4, 2014. On May 9, 2017, The Intercept announced he was leaving.

Looks like he has been fired from more than one publication and yet he is a reliable source? rofl:

[Hav]

13. The media loves nothing more than seeing the frontrunner fail

That's a common theme. The frontrunner attracts much attention and anything remotely negative is always amplified.
They went for Biden the moment he announced.

I also disagree with the following opinion:
"The two most important roles for journalists during political primary season are to cull the herd of the weakest candidates and take their best shots at the frontrunner, to test his or her readiness for the general election. That's a public service for the political ecosystem. "

But that stance explains the partisan mindset of the author.

[Fiendish Thingy]

16. If it isn't the media's job to vet candidates, then whose job is it? Nt

[Hav]

25. His comments suggest something more than vetting

Truthfully reporting a candidate's positions and actions is what a journalist is supposed to do. His job is not to cull the herd and the assessment of who is ready for the general election is up to the voters as well.

[PatSeg]

33. Exactly

A journalist is supposed to report the news, not create it. "Culling the herd" and assessing who is ready, is the voters' job.

[Fiendish Thingy]

41. It is the media's job examine a candidate's legitimate flaws and shortcomings to inform voters

When the press plays stenographer, the public is robbed of crucial information, and people die (see Iraq war coverage).

They should not only report on a candidate’s positions, but on their competencies, their strength and weaknesses too.

[PatSeg]

58. Yes

If they can do so without manipulating the information to create a news story or without showing a clear bias.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

39. Sometimes journalists need to be vetted, too.

Everyone has biases, but good journalists are able to set theirs aside and report facts as objectively as they can. I don't know whether this was intended only as an opinion piece, but if so, the writer should at least base his opinion on verifiable facts. Biden has never gotten a free pass from the press, which for years has delighted in pointing out his so-called "gaffes" (his verbal tics and hesitations probably based on his stammer), his age, ancient votes, etc. Vetting Mr. Froomkin tends to indicate that he is not an objective commentator.

[Fiendish Thingy]

42. And that's the delicate nature of this criticism

its Not Biden’s verbal tics and stammer that are of concern, it’s his inability to stay on topic and express a complete, coherent thought. This problem has increased significantly since he left office, and there is plenty of evidence to support it, just in the debates alone.

That Biden could be experiencing cognitive decline is a very real issue that voters deserve to hear about, just as important and valid as concerns about Sanders’ physical health.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

19. It's not up to journalists to "cull the herd." That's up to voters.

Journalists' job is simply to report the truth accurately and without bias and without "taking shots at the frontrunner," which they do mainly to sell their product by artificially creating controversy. That's not journalism, it's just shit-stirring for its own sake.

[PatSeg]

35. Oh my goodness

I just said practically the same thing. I hadn't read your comment yet, so I wasn't imitating you! I didn't use the word "shit-stirring" though, much more effective.

[msongs]

23. part of the massive media conspiracy against bernie nt

[Thekaspervote]

31. Joking...right?!

[SharonClark]

26. The MSM is not being gentle with Biden

But I would expect such an inaccurate statement from the anti-Democratic Party The Intercept.

The real problem with the MSM is that it holds Dems to a higher standard than Repugs and has normalized Trump.

[TwilightZone]

32. "this is legitimate, evidence based criticism"

No, it's not. It's opinion and a selective one at that, though that's no surprise considering the source.

[Sloumeau]

34. Really? You posted something from professional

Biden Basher and Bernie supporter Dan Froomkin? Let's look at Froomkin's most recent tweets:

Notably, in HuffPost, not the NYT: Joe Biden Doubles Down On A Racist Myth About Black Parents https://www.huffpost.com/entry/joe-biden-racist-myth-black-parents_n_5e2215a9c5b674e44b980327?ncid=engmodushpmg00000004 … by @RottenInDenmark

Press Watch is up @salon: Why is the mainstream media so gentle with Joe Biden?

A profoundly weak front-runner should be the ultimate in big game for our top political reporters. https://presswatchers.org/2020/01/why-is-the-mainstream-media-so-gentle-to-joe-biden/ … via @froomkin

Why is the mainstream media so gentle to Joe Biden?

OK, so first we see 3 tweets pimping his article bashing Biden, then a tweet promoting an article where someone else bashed Biden. So, it is not just about him publicizing his own article.

So, how does Dan Froomkin feel about Bernie Sanders?:

Asking Bernie of Trump: "How can you expect people to think you will be any different from him?” has got to be the single stupidest debate question every asked by anyone.

Bernie Sanders hires @fshakir as campaign manager. https://www.thedailybeast.com/bernie-sanders-hires-top-civil-liberties-advocate-faiz-shakir-as-campaign-manager … Big loss for @ACLU.

Oh, Froomkin seems to really like Bernie Sanders. In one tweet he complains that Sanders got asked a bad question. In another tweet he points out that Sanders hired a campaign manager, In that same tweet, Froomkin then points to an article talking about how that new campaign manager is one of the most seasoned progressives in the party.

Now, in the article you posted, Froomkin decides right off the bat that Biden is weak, and therefore, people should be grilling him a lot more. Since Froomkin, who obviously has problems with Biden and likes Sanders, does not see Biden being grilled as much as he would like, Froomkin apparently reasons that this must be due to the fact that the press is guilty of timidity where Biden is concerned.

The simple fact is, a number of issues that Froomkin points out are old, and anyone who wants to look up what the press asked him back then can be looked up. But that is not good enough for Froomkin. He wants people asking the same types of questions of Biden that Biden was asked, and then proceeded to answer, years ago.

The first thing a good reporter does with a topic or an issue is to look up what's already available about that topic or issue, and if they can find the answer without having to ask someone a question, that is what they do. It is called "research". Otherwise, politicians get irritated with reporters for asking the same question that has been asked and answered a million times. Froomkin wants people to think that reporters are timid with regard to Biden. Nope, reporters are just not wasting the time of anyone who has already been asked the standard questions about an issue over and over again.

In other words, when it comes to Joe Biden, Dan Froomkin is a partisan hack.

[Fiendish Thingy]

43. So, all the posts of concerns about Sanders' health are garbage too?

I think all candidates’ physical, emotional and cognitive health should be vetted thoroughly, don’t you?

[Sloumeau]

46. I am thinking that you replied to my post but meant to...

reply to another one? Otherwise, I am not sure exactly what you talking about.

My post was saying that I believed that Dan Froomkin was a partisan hack, which is why he was going after Joe Biden. What are yhou talking about?

[LeftTurn3623]

37. Don't worry

The media will do all that once he is the nominee. They will do Trump’s bidding

[beachbumbob]

38. I see nothing but criticism on Biden every where I look

the media is doing the work of the elite. We know when Biden is the nominee, trump has very little chance to win. And GOp could see absolute disaster all across the country at every level from Biiden's coat tails

[Fiendish Thingy]

44. You're looking in the wrong places

There’s lots of media fawning over Biden, from Morning Joe to The View to many of the moderate and former Republican pundits and guests on MSNBC and elsewhere.

[TwilightZone]

48. If you can only support the author's point by selectively editing...

it isn't much of a point.

If you choose to ignore all evidence to the contrary of said argument, you're not going to convince anyone that it's accurate.

[Fiendish Thingy]

49. A simple comparison of pre-2016 videos of Biden with clips from the debates is sufficient evidence

To show his cognitive functioning has declined noticeably in the past few years.

[jalan48]

55. +1

[redstateblues]

52. Oh please. The media has been bashing Joe since

He announced. They have touted his demise from day 1

[Fiendish Thingy]

54. I guess we all listen differently depending on our biases

My experience has been that the media by and large gives Biden a pass on the hard questions, even when answers softball questions incoherently, touts Sanders as a sure loser, and can only seem to focus on Warren’s “electability”.

[emmaverybo]

57. +++++++++++++++++

[redqueen]

45. Because they know any politician who has been in office for decades

will be less likely to beat the incumbent, who makes their bosses happy.

[Demsrule86]

53. Those who want Trump to win are saying they will vote for Sanders in the primary...well he has been

there for decades, but Trump committed treason to try to eliminate the electoral threat Biden presents who has also been in office for decades. Thus the length of government service is not the deciding factor...it is called experience and competence.

[emmaverybo]

56. I watched MSNBC in the wake of Linda Flores' and other women's claims about Joe's over familiarity

and also followed the controversy on online news sites. The coverage inflated the matter, used language that conflated standing too close for comfort or putting an arm around the waist with sexual abuse and rape allegations. MSNBC guests demanded an apology from Joe and portrayed
what at most was a social faux pas committed publicly as in a class with Harvey Weinstein’s crimes.

Again, I watched MSNBC after the first debate. Openly hostile hosts interviewed a campaign
spokesperson and were dismissive while airing the Harris confrontation practically on loop all day and evening, and finding only anti-Joe AA guests despite his wide support in black communities and with black leaders. This pattern of biased coverage was repeated at CNN and throughout online media.

And of course the gaffes coverage.

Still, today, with Joe having 50 percent of potential black voters’ support, MSNBC only invites commentary from AA detractors.

With great persistence and tenacity, MSM has also ignored and underestimated Biden while playing up “rising stars” who are far less qualified for the presidency than Biden and not nearly as widely
respected and liked.

The idea that somehow MSM is in Biden’s corner is ludicrous. While not as universally bashing as of Obama on 2008, MSM shows no warmth and little interest, much less fair representation, for
Biden’s candidacy. Goes without saying, the predominantly progressive Democratic leaning internet news forums are demeaning and mean-spirited toward Joe.

Amazing considering not only that Biden was Obama’s VP but such an engaged, loyal, powerful, and accomplished one.

[melman]

60. Gentle is putting it mildly

More like they actively run interference for him.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

62. Yes, this is a very important topic, but one most will ignore because of Bernie.

Bernie/Elizabeth or Elizabeth/Bernie 2020!!
Either way, they're stronger together & can't be bought!!
Jump on the Bernie Bandwagon & join the revolution!!