Media Bias Circus: CNN’s Jim Acosta’s coverage of Clinton vs. Obama

Is it me or did anyone else notice the extreme bias of the media against Barak Obama this Sunday in all news shows?  Whether it’s just a media circus game to extend the political party with a longer nomination fight, or whether it was Senator Clinton’s machine that appealed to the media establishment, it is fascinating how biased the media was.

The clearest and most patent example of downright dishonest coverage came this Sunday around 1:40pm EST when Jim Acosta from CNN covered the Indiana contest as follows:

Hillary Clinton: about 10 minutes of coverage of her canned speech about how she challenges Barak Obama to a one-on-one debate.  The coverage was at a campaign event with hundreds of enthusiastic supporters applauding her every sentence.

Jim Acosta did nothing to put Senator Clinton’s disingenuous challenge or cynical tone in perspective.  Never mind that everyone’s tired of these endless debates – is it 22 so far? A record?  If I have to watch another debate I might shoot myself.

Then Acosta turned to purportedly provide the "Obama" side of things by introducing the segment as follows:

Acosta: Barak Obama essentially saying, ‘No we can’t.’

Acosta then shows footage catching Obama in a parking lot on the way from an event to another, asking him questions that were barely audible, with long pauses and faint sounds and silly questions that did not address any issues.  Will he accept Clinton’s challenge for a one-on-one debate? Barak just explains, if you can hear him in the faint audio provided, that he wants to go straight to the people and meet the people directly, rather than in a studio.

But it gets worse.  After creating this boring anti-climatic experience, Acosta says in a very condescending tone:

Acosta: There you have it.  [Obama] telling the people of Indiana he’d prefer to stick to his photo ops.

Acosta then goes on to mock Obama’s Campaign Director, David Axelrod (sp?), with some comment about how he sounded like Dr. Seuss’s Green Eggs and Ham.

I am not making any of this up.  I have it on DVR and went back and watched it because I thought I had missed something.  Did anyone else see this and get as sick about biased media coverage as I did?

Digg This
Reddit This
Stumble Now!
Buzz This
Vote on DZone
Share on Facebook
Bookmark this on Delicious
Kick It on
Shout it
Share on LinkedIn
Bookmark this on Technorati
Post on Twitter
Google Buzz (aka. Google Reader)

related posts


  1. Linda said:

    This is funny. I just sent the following e-mail to CNN:

    “Did you check reporter Jim Acosta’s credentials? Did he study journalism? Because I was astonished to hear him say that “the Clintons have gone from blaming the media for counting her out too soon to now blaming the Democratic Party. Wolf, Hillary Clinton is running out of people to blame…”
    Mr. Acosta’s phrasing and choice of words here would suggest that there is no basis for the Clinton campaign’s concerns. But that is a matter of OPINION. There are in fact many who feel that there is a great deal of merit to their concerns. It is NOT everyone’s opinion that they are seeking to pass the buck or “blaming” anyone (with the crybaby connotation of that word) as Mr. Acosta’s “reporting” would imply. That is merely his INTERPRETATION and clearly reflects a personal bias, neither of which belong in serious journalism! Pathetic. (Apparently Mr. Acosta also needs to be reminded to stop referring to “the Clintons” plural. And yes I know that in this case he is referring in part to something said by Bill Clinton, but he is still supposedly talking generally about the Clinton CAMPAIGN.)
    Quite frankly, all of this is the sort of stuff that actually backs up the Clinton campaign’s complaints about the media!”

    Maybe this guy is just a bad journalist! Pro Obama or Pro Hillary, we need better jounalists!!!

post a new comment