As both the liberal & conservative mainstream media continue to intentionally ignore Republican Party presidential candidate Ron Paul, they have at times explained their intentional disregard for his voice and suppression of his message as their infallible belief he hasn’t got a chance in hell of winning.
In my blog Tuesday I addressed Pew Research’s finding that traditional media have essentially continued to blackball Congressman Paul. The Christian Science Monitor attempted to diminish Pew’s claim. CSM perceives their product slighted through exclusion in Pew’s evaluation. What CSM fails to realize is the mainstream media makes or breaks a campaign. They shouldn’t, but they most certainly directly influence elections and their exclusion of Paul from the discourse, except as a punchline, is dooming to his campaign.
His online presence among supporters is second-to-none. In fact, user-generated content explodes on YouTube, Facebook and Twitter every time the GOP holds a debate and Paul receives minimal attention.
Several online publications have published findings proving he receives the least amount of time at debates. The Digital Journal opined here, the lack of time would make sense had he flamed out spectacularly like Rick Perry did in this video:
But Paul hasn’t, he has routinely fielded difficult questions asked in a manner intended to entrap him among viewers like this.
He not only fields the question with grace, but gives a thoughtful, intelligent and reasoned response. So, what’s the problem? My personal thought is the mainstream media is primarily owned by corporations, unlike the federal government, corporations don’t operate on the fuel of incompetence. They recognize Paul’s election would present a threat to crony capitalism and their unfettered control of federal legislation. Not only is this a motive for suppression, but it’s also a motive for Occupy Wall Street to throw their support behind his candidacy.
Their argument has essentially been that Paul has no chance of winning an election as he’s just, “too far out there.” As a friend of a friend commented on a Facebook post this week, “he’s insane.” Well, if that’s the case, then why not put him out there in front of the public and allow the late night hosts and public the opportunity to recognize this supposed insanity?
They certainly don’t seem to object when Michele Bachmann opens mouth and proceeds to projectile vomit insanity all over the American people.
Is Paul’s message anywhere near as “out there” as hers?
Or how about the poster boy for bigotry, hatred, prejudice and discrimination, Rick Santorum? He’s been on a national tour spewing his hate for homosexuality and the mainstream media has no objection to giving him press. Could Paul be any worse than this guy? (starting at 1:14)
Just in case Rick failed to convince you of his total lack of common sense.
And the media certainly hasn’t objected in the least to giving both Mitt Romney and Herman Cain a boon of media coverage and has named them, as well as Michele Bachmann and Rick Perry, front runners in the primary campaign.
But what’s this? A report indicating Cain and Romney have both been committing campaign fraud. Cain by using campaign funds to purchase copies of his book, thus driving up sales numbers; and Romney by essentially laundering his own money into his campaign through a financial consultant who currently is business partners with Romney’s son.
Something’s rotten in America. We all know the news cycle is built on ratings and reports, but the press have wholly abandoned their purpose of reporting facts objectively. Were they following the Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics, the candidates would receive equal time and the truly nauseating Perrys, Bachmanns, Santorums and Gingrichs would be exposed for the totally disconnected individuals they are; were the press to do their jobs, Romney & Cain would possibly be subject to criminal investigations for fraud.
Yet there’s Ron Paul. A man whose message of liberty and prosperity for all, who calls for the end of corporatism and crony capitalism, a man with an ideologically consistent record not of months, but decades, and the media can’t ignore him enough. Lest you believe the mainstream media I refer to excludes the borderline-useless Fox News, nope. After a debate in which he was given the closest to equal time of any of the eight debates thus far, he’s mentioned in one sentence at the end of the article.
Judge for yourselves, is this man off his nut?