MSM Influence Fading...or Backfiring?
Category: News Commentary... Politics...
Posted Tuesday, November 09, 2004 at 02:12 PM [GMT-6]

Texas Insider has an interesting editorial about the apparent irrelevancy of print media endorsements in the presidential election.

According to Editor & Publisher Magazine, 211 newspapers endorsed Kerry nationwide, representing a circulation of over twenty-million subscribers.

Sixty papers that supported Bush in 2000 switched to Kerry or did not endorse this year. In a separate tally, Knight-Ridder papers endorsed Kerry over Bush 18 to 3.

President Bush was supported by 197 newspapers mostly from the South and "heartland" areas. The readers of the "Bush-endorsing" newspapers totaled 14.6 million.

I don't believe that I've ever been influenced one way or another by a newspaper's endorsement of a candidate or voting issue, but if I have, it's been in the opposite direction of the endorsement. For example, if the New York Times endorses a candidate, I've learned that that's probably all I need to know to support his or her opponent. I suspect I'm not the only person for whom the MSM's influence has been reduced to a caricature.

Permalink
Comments

"For example, if the New York Times endorses a candidate, I've learned that that's probably all I need to know to support his or her opponent."

*guffaws*

I've noticed the same thing! I usually just check and see who Sarah Brady is endorsing and vote the opposite, but that's just me.

("the Brady Bunch, the Brady Bunch, that's the way they became the Brady Bunch")

Posted by: Mr. Freen at November 9, 2004 05:54 PM
Post a comment [Take your time...we're in no hurry.]
Note: You must provide either a website URL or an email address...but there's no rule that says you have to tell the truth. If you don't want your email address published on this site, just input a website URL, or make up an email address.









Remember personal info?