Monday, October 15, 2012

Now that Mitt Romney is as "Likeable" as Obama...

..."likeability" - which was not on the presidental matrix until Obama - is no longer something the press is interested in.

Convenient, eh what?

Jennifer Rubin remarks:
Around the time of the Republican National Convention, the single word on the lips of most of the press corps was “likability.” Mitt Romney did not have it. We have never elected someone with such a negative image. He was a stiff. He was a boring rich guy. Yeah, the economy stinks, but President Obama has “likability.”

Well, the economy still stinks. But the likability gap is gone, although the press is mum about a fundamental shift in the public perception of the GOP nominee. Looking at the RealClearPolitics average, Obama is in positive territory with a favorable to unfavorable split of 50.8 percent to 45.4 percent. Mitt Romney’s numbers are statistically the same. He has a 49.2 percent to 44.4 favorable/unfavorable split.

The Romney image created by the Obama ad bombardment was unlikable, but the actual candidate turned out to be an astonishingly decent person and extremely capable. The clash between the cartoon Romney and the real Romney seems to have jolted the electorate.

As for the media, the intellectual dishonesty should no longer surprise us, but it is disconcerting nevertheless. Romney’s unlikability is not only news but a media obsession. When he solves that issue, mum’s the word.

It is not unlike the Libya phenomenon. When Libya means a Romney gaffe, it is front-page news. When Libya is a shining example of “leading from behind,” it is fair game. But when Libya becomes a story about serial misrepresentations by the Obama administration and a serious security lapse, it takes weeks for the story to migrate back to the front page — in large part due to the reporting by Eli Lake and coverage in conservative media.

Because the nice thing about having a Democrat in the White House is that there is no such thing as "bad news."

Rubin, who writes for the Washington Post, notes that the mainstream media has managed to hand alternative media a "niche market" consisting of a majority of Americans:

In each and every instance, the media’s “news judgment” coincided with the White House’s political interests. This is the most egregious aspect of mainstream bias. Mainstream reporters and liberal pundits will ignore inconvenient facts and discard attention-getting topics to fit a liberal agenda. It is one thing when commentators on the left put their fingers in their ears and hum when the Libya fiasco comes along. (Unlike the right, the left tends not to beat up on their own but rather to circle the wagons). But for the “news” to consistently ignore ”bad” news for the left is indefensible.

This is why the conservative media has flourished; it has the news that has been deliberately tossed on the discard pile by the mainstream coverage.


No comments:

Who links to me?