Flashback - Media Matters Article Comparing Press Coverage of Clinton/Bush - Media Double Standard

[Median Democrat]

Here is a very relevant article comparing media coverage of Bill Clinton and George Bush. The comparison between the press's hostile treatment of Clinton and its fawning treatment of George Bush are amazing. Of course, this coverage became worse following 9/11 as the Bush administration used 9/11 to manipulate and browbeat the press. Now, with a Democratic administration, the media has been in full spin trying to misrepresent the positions of the Obama administration, and blame him for Bush's recession and wars.

http://mediamatters.org/columns/200811190014

/snip

One quick example: On January 31, 1993, 12 days after Clinton had been sworn into office, Sam Donaldson appeared on ABC and made this jarring announcement: "Last week, we could talk about, 'Is the honeymoon over?' This week, we can talk about, 'Is the presidency over?' " (At the time, Clinton's approval rating hovered around 65 percent.)

By contrast, on February 10, 2001, three weeks after Bush had been sworn into office, The New York Times' Frank Bruni penned a gentle, honeymoon-mode review about how authentic and at ease Bush seemed with his new role. "George W. Bush is establishing a no-fuss, no-sweat, 'look-Ma-no-hands' presidency, his exertions ever measured, his outlook always mirthful," wrote Bruni. "The gilded robes of the presidency have not obscured Mr. Bush's innate goofiness -- or, for that matter, his insistent folksiness."

Bruni's piece was a classic example of what in journalism is called a "beat-sweetener." It's where a reporter assigned to a new beat ingratiates himself with key sources by writing flattering profiles. There were precious few White House beat-sweeteners published in 1993.

/snip

Is the honeymoon over? Haven't we heard this already with respect to Obama? Is the press simply cutting and pasting its articles from the Clinton presidency?

[Cha]

1. It's so fucking obvious.

Rec'd~

[firedupdem]

2. The double standard is hard to miss. They are working

tirelessly to turn everyone in a negative direction toward this presidency. I can't even watch. It's disgusting.

[rvablue]

4. Hard to miss, but we do have to keep in mind the small attention span of

low information voters.

I wish someone on cable would do a comparison, but I can't see them calling out their own networks on it.

[firedupdem]

5. That's exactly who they are targeting with this mess. It took

Jon Stewart to call out Cramer after he'd even been on with Tweety yelling his nonsense. The call out won't come from the major players for sure. They protect each other.

[rvablue]

3. Thanks for posting. This info needs to stay on the front page until next

week so every single DUer and lurker can read it and remember.

[NewJeffCT]

6. I've had a few LTTEs published on similar recently

It's really disgusting how Republicans have dominated the airwaves the past 2 months.

[FrenchieCat]

7. I remember when Bush stole the election in 2000,

I couldn't find a single Democrat on my Television till like 6 months later, and then it was on C-Span. What a difference 8 years make! :crazy:

[Median Democrat]

8. Also, Compare Media Coverage Over AIG With Enron Debacle Involving Bush's Buddies

Enron helped cause power outages in California, was placed on Cheney's secret energy task force, and Kenneth Lay was a close personal buddy to George Bush. Heck, Phil Gramm's wife was tied to Enron. Yet, never did the media stoke outrage to the degree you see with the Obama administration, which essentially inherited this huge mess.

AIG cratered back in September 2008. The bonus contracts at issue were signed back then. Yet, Obama gets grief that makes the controversy surrounding Enron pale in comparison. The irony that Republicans are complaining is particularly glaring given their failure to increase regulation in light of the Enron scandal.