I know I promised (sort of) to (mostly) keep the politics off the blog, but
this article from the
Columbia Journalism Review is too good to pass up. It catches the usual anti-Democrat media bias right in the act--and indisputably, too. Seriously,
what liberal media?
The campaign press in the summer of 2000 was entranced with John. It tumbled all over itself to describe John as the perfect match for what it saw as the somewhat wooden, robot-like Gore. One newspaper described John as a man with "an easy manner and good looks," a politician whose "charisma [might] rub off on [Gore]," a person who could "bring some charm to the ticket." John's selection, it opined, would signal that Gore "thinks the election will be decided on personality." A television reporter also regarded this John as "charismatic." Another newspaper saw him as "younger and more telegenic than Dick Cheney." Yet a third newspaper called him "handsome," with "a record tailor-made to undermine the standard Republican attack on liberal Democrats."
...
What a difference 1,460 days make.
Pretty much says it all.
# posted by
Gerry Canavan @ 5:36 PM
|