Why the MSM doesn't cover Paul...

[Richandler]

I reminded myself today, by turning on the television, that these major news networks do not stop bickering constantly about the latest gossip in Washington. And I realized, if Paul gets elected this BS will slowly disappear and with that all the MSM jobs will literally start disappearing. They don't cover Ron Paul because if he wins they lose everything except maybe OJ.

[Paulitician]

They'd actually have to do honest, hard-hitting journalism. And yeah, that's never going to happen.

[hopeforamerica]

There's always Brittany Spears and Paris Hilton.

[Kregener]

HERE (http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.text.html) is why the MSM does not have anything good to say about Ron Paul.

[fj45lvr]

they know that they can't cover who paul really is or he would likely be elected!!

I guess they are counting on people to vote for people because of how "good looking" they are, or what their gender or ethnic background are.....you know, all the unique ways that some folks select who to vote for (and their vote counts as much as yours or mine.....deviating from the founders voting requirements was such a big mistake).

[Zydeco]

Yup. DC screens for statists the way LA screens for high school drama club members.

[trispear]

Simply covering Paul would make all their favorite pre-selected candidates look bad in comparison.

[hard@work]

They'd actually have to do honest, hard-hitting journalism. And yeah, that's never going to happen.

Only if we rise up and demand it.

[DjLoTi]

Simply covering Paul would make all their favorite pre-selected candidates look bad in comparison.

Not only that, but it would just add fuel to the hydrogen splitting fire ;)

[V-rod]

Looks like MSNBC is the only network with some brains and try to give some more fair coverage of Ron Paul than the idiots working for CNN and FoxNews.

[Eli]

perhaps waging war on the Internet wasn't the smartest of moves on the mainstream media's part...

[FluffyUnbound]

I reminded myself today, by turning on the television, that these major news networks do not stop bickering constantly about the latest gossip in Washington. And I realized, if Paul gets elected this BS will slowly disappear and with that all the MSM jobs will literally start disappearing. They don't cover Ron Paul because if he wins they lose everything except maybe OJ.

There's actually a lot to this statement.

There's a well-known bias among historians for activist Presidents who increase the scope of government, for the simple reason that this creates something to write about. Small-government Presidents don't make a lot of work for historians. And historians also really, really love war Presidents, because that creates the most to write about of all.

Journalists are just historians with a really narrow frame of reference and a tighter deadline to meet, so that same bias would have to be in play there too.