double standards

[realthog]

Jamison Foser of Media Matters has posted an excellent -- and in some ways quite frightening -- article today at http://mediamatters.org/items/200806270008?f=h_top. Here are extracts:

Last week, the Center for American Progress Action Fund released a new report by Michael Ettlinger estimating that under McCain's tax plan, he and his wife, Cindy, would save $373,429. That's nearly $400,000 -- per year, not over the course of their lifetimes. (Under Barack Obama's plan, the McCains would save less than $6,000. The Obamas would save nearly $50,000 under McCain's plan, and slightly more than $6,000 under Obama's plan own plan.)

By the standards the media applied to [John] Edwards, the fact that McCain supports tax policies that would save him and his wife nearly $400,000 a year -- and require massive cuts to public services to pay for those tax breaks -- should surely be news. [. . .]

Surely, then, The Washington Post, having obsessed over Edwards' wealth, has noted Ettlinger's findings in its reports about McCain's tax plans, right?

Wrong. [. . .]

The Ettlinger estimate was completely ignored by the news media. Beyond that report, I don't remember ever seeing a major-media report about John McCain's tax policies noting that, due to his wealth, he would fare quite well under his own proposals. And in a couple hours of Nexis searches, I haven't been able to find one.

Perversely, it seems the conventional wisdom among the media is that it's more acceptable for a wealthy politician to propose policies that help the wealthy than policies that benefit the middle class and the poor.

Bearing in mind that a large percentage of the US public get all their news -- and hence their opinions -- from mainstream news sources, primarily the TV, doesn't it seem something of a betrayal of democracy that those same mainstream news sources display what can only be one of these two: (a) atrocious pro-Republican bias or (b) a lack of basic journalistic competence?

Foser's weekly columns are generally must-reads, by the way. You can sign up for them at http://mediamatters.org/users/sign_up?source=banner_200806270008.

Comments

[al-zorra.livejournal.com]

Gotcha!

Do you subscribe to nexis?

Love, C.

[realthog.livejournal.com]

"Do you subscribe to nexis?"

'Fraid not.

[nballingrud.livejournal.com]

Thanks for that link. I just signed up. Now I can feel angry and helpless on a more reliable schedule!

[realthog.livejournal.com]

"Now I can feel angry and helpless on a more reliable schedule!"

Glad to hear it! There's nothing worse than sloppily scheduled anger and helplessness. You hippy libruls should introduce a bit more discipline into your lives.

And, if it's discipline you want, I can recommend just the gal . . .

[sarcobatus.livejournal.com]

"if it's discipline you want, I can recommend just the gal"

Wow, you "do" like to live dangerously! You must be nearly fully recovered, to venture such a statement. ;)

No fruit cup for you!

*High Anxiety*

[sarcobatus.livejournal.com]

Hear, hear!

Good link! I'm surprised, however, that a librul actuvist like yourself would post such an article . . . ;D

[realthog.livejournal.com]

You callin' me a librul actuvist? Hell dang, if you wasn't a li'l lady I'd . . . Shee-eesk! I can feel my neck turnin' red with rage already!

[sarcobatus.livejournal.com]

My word, but Nevada has a long reach. Already you are sounding like a bona-fie-dee redneck! (It's Pam's fault, isn't it . . .)

[fledgist.livejournal.com]

I'd go for lack of basic competence.