Salon.com on the media: "A 'free ride' for Obama and Edwards?"

[milkyway]

http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/

In an interview aired on ABC this morning, Hillary Clinton complained that Barack Obama and John Edwards have received "pretty much a free ride" in this political season. "That's fine," she said. "I don't mind having to get up there and take all the scrutiny. But at some point the free ride ends, maybe it ends now, maybe it ends in a month maybe it ends in the general election. You cannot be elected president if you do not withstand the tough questions."

A "free ride"? While we're not saying that the press has been easy on Clinton -- it hasn't been -- it's pretty hard to make the case that it has given either Edwards or Obama a pass on the way to the White House.

Here's the campaign coverage we've been watching:

Jan. 3, 2007: In a front-page story, the Washington Post says Obama's "candor" about "early, bad choices, including drug use starting in high school and ending in college, as well as his tortured search for racial identity" could cause problems for him as he runs for president.

Jan. 17, 2007: Insight magazine reports -- falsely -- that Barack Obama was educated in a Madrassa. Fox News picks up the story and runs with it, at least until CNN sets the record straight.

Feb. 8, 2007: The Associated Press produces a lengthy story on the size of Edwards' home, suggesting that the house's large size and cost are in conflict with Edwards' anti-poverty message, and that this conflict is hurting him with voters.

<more at link>

[The_Casual_Observer]

1. Salon practically called Obama the new messiah in a piece yesterday.

[milkyway]

8. That article was by Gary Kamiya. This article on media coverage is from Tim Grieve

and Alex Koppelman. Salon isn't a single entity, thinking and writing as one. Besides, this is a listing of factual information trying to refute the Clintons assertion. To include Edwards as having gotten favorable media coverage doesn't make any sense at all and weakens their argument, making them seem like they're whining.

[last1standing]

2. By definition, don't you need to actually mention a candidate in order to give them a free ride?

There have been plenty of positive and negative articles on both Clinton and Obama while little media coverage either way for Edwards - even after he came in second in Iowa. That's the story I'd like to read about in Salon.

[LisaM]

3. You forgot the haircut!

Forget poverty, jobs, the environment. He actually (gasp!) compensated someone for the time they took to come and cut his hair.

[americanstranger]

4. And it was a STYLIST, not a barber!

Sounds downright French to me!

/snark

- as

[OzarkDem]

5. Edwards isn't getting a ride at all

zero, nada zip. Almost no coverage.

[LibraLiz1973]

6. Since they ignore Edwards almost entirely, I am thinking not.

[ihavenobias]

7. Here's all the proof you need that neither has gotten a "free ride"

http://foxattacks.com/senators

[bpeale]

9. no, they are just ignoring Edwards

and saving vitriol for Obama if he makes it. they're being too damned quiet.