This is truly one of the clearest examples of media bias I’ve seen in a long time…at least since last week, anyway.
President Barack Obama walks into a window because he thought it was a door. If the media had any sanity left they’d leave it as just a humorous moment. But guess what – the NY Daily News feels the need to point out that it was the Republicans fault that Obama walked into the window. And besides, they say, Bush once tried to open a locked door:
It looks like President Obama hasn’t gotten acquainted to his White House surroundings. On the way back to the Oval Office Tuesday, the President approached a paned window, instead of the actual door — located a few feet to his right.
Doors didn’t open automatically for Obama’s predecessor either. While making a hasty exit from a 2005 press conference in Beijing, former President George W. Bush tugged on the handles of a door, only to find it locked.
Bush laughed off the blunder, but the pictures still live on as part of Bush’s lame duck legacy. However, there was little note taken of Obama’s rookie mistake.
Obama, who was returning from meeting with Congressional leaders, may have been distracted by Republicans’ icy reception to his $825 billion stimulus package, which is poised to pass on Wednesday even without a groundswell of Republican support.
So Bush tried to open up a locked door (which had the advantage of actually being a door) and it’s emblematic of his legacy. But Obama tries to walk through a window and it’s because of the Republicans icy reception.
Nah. No bias in that story. Nothing to see here. Move along.
January 28, 2009 at 8:59 pm
No bias, no completely ridiculous commentary, no total waste of space. The Republicans not wanting to waste money (for the first time in a long time) makes Obama mistake a door-look-alike-window for a door. It’s just a rookie mistake. Real errors of judgment, however, shall be passed over.
January 28, 2009 at 9:14 pm
The idea that anyone should care about how the president opens doors is remarkably stupid.
January 28, 2009 at 9:51 pm
Gah. My head is going to explode from the sheer lunacy of the media.
January 28, 2009 at 10:30 pm
Yup. slow news day all around I see.
January 29, 2009 at 12:51 am
Darn those evil Republicans!! The Bush administration probably removed all the “Push” signs off the doors and put up “Pull” signs instead! How dare they do that to the One?!?
January 29, 2009 at 1:35 am
Maybe I’m not in on the big story here, but why exactly should anyone care if the media is biased? It’s bordering on the obsessive with this anymore. Okay, the media is biased; we got it. Who cares? If you don’t like what they are saying, don’t listen.
~cmpt
January 29, 2009 at 1:53 am
CMTP,
the media plays a large role in where this country is. Barack Obama, the abortion proponent, is president largely because of the media.
January 29, 2009 at 2:51 am
That is just funny. Okay, maybe it is also sad.
January 29, 2009 at 3:23 am
cmtp
Don’t you see the irony of you admonishing us to move on because “if you don’t like what they are saying, don’t listen.”
Could we not, for example, say the same to you? Should we not care about something because you don’t care? Are we forcing you to read?
Ok, Maybe I’m not in on the big story here, but why exactly should care what you think?
It is always recommended to actually think before commenting. Only a suggestion though. Far be it from us to tell you what to do.
January 29, 2009 at 5:32 am
Patrick,
Maybe it is you who didn’t quite think it through before you commented. The difference between you and me is the you read my comments, whereas I get the distinction feeling that Katie Couric, Charles Gibson, and Brian Williams aren’t fans of CMR.
My point thus is: why preach to the choir? Anybody who reads CMR already knows that most people in the media are liberally biased. That is part of the reason they read CMR. I wasn’t trying to criticize you guys, I was simply trying to point out that this isn’t exactly news and you won’t change anybody’s mind by beating it to death. Maybe I’m wrong though.
~cmpt
January 29, 2009 at 12:00 pm
Christopher – I for one was of the staunch opinion that there was no bias in the media whatsoever. But when I read this particular post, the heavens opened up and I finally saw the light and the reality for what it is. I am a new man because of it. I was living in darkness, yet now I know there is media bias, something which I clearly would never have known otherwise. Nope, all those other posts on the subject, plus my own personal common sense were for naught…until now.
January 29, 2009 at 12:35 pm
Surely just a “veiling of the Glory” in order to elicit more faith from the Faithful. After all, the Son of God can walk through closed windows.
January 29, 2009 at 1:33 pm
Rob,
My thought exactly.
January 29, 2009 at 3:29 pm
cmpt
So if Republicans don’t like what the media is saying, we shouldn’t listen, but if Democrats don’t like what the media is saying, they should start petitions against radio talk show hosts and discuss instituting the “Fairness Doctrine”?
January 29, 2009 at 3:37 pm
Anonymous, I sincerely doubt the vast majority of Democrats like what Rush and the Scarecrow say, yet they say it anyway in their own media. It cuts both ways. As Chris says, it’s just not news, nor anything to get worked up about.
January 29, 2009 at 3:45 pm
Deusdonat, my point wasn’t that it cuts both ways…My point was that if the Democrats don’t like what’s being said in the media, they attempt to snuff it out…petitions against Limbaugh, the Fairness Doctrine, etc. It’s not a “live and let live” situation.
January 29, 2009 at 4:36 pm
Deusdonat and Anonymous,
My point is more or less the anti-thesis of the Fairness Doctrine. I do not at all harbour any belief that the media “owes” it to the public to be fair or unbiased in the way they do or do not report the news. The media is run by private corporations and individuals who ought to be free to opine as they please if you believe in freedom of the press. I don’t, but I realize that many of CMR’s readers are sympathetic to one extent or another to democracy and the Modern project, so I am working inside that framework.
I honestly think the news is far more interesting when it is biased, which is why I usually watch Fox. They are more or less the only network which is open and unapologetic about their bias. As I’ve said before, “unbiased” media is intrinsically impossible and it shouldn’t be the goal, as though if the media started reporting without bias that would help anything at all. It wouldn’t. Anybody stupid enough to believe the media word for word doesn’t deserve the truth anyway.
Pax,
~cmpt
January 29, 2009 at 4:55 pm
Correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t media objectivism a relatively new concept anyway? It seems that earlier newspapers were all of one particular political stripe or another and no one minded. The difference was, of course, that the papers didn’t try to hide their bias, but declared it openly.
January 29, 2009 at 6:13 pm
The original entry was a funny observation. Then some commentors with a bee in their bonnet came on and…made it even funnier! Thanks!
January 29, 2009 at 10:34 pm
Mike in CT,
You’re not wrong. You’re quite right. Thanks for getting the point.
~cmpt