PDA

View Full Version : **Did we get any exposure at all?**




cska80
01-20-2008, 06:52 AM
Did we get any interviews, segments, or anything last night other than that quick MSNBC thing? I can see the blatant disinfo operation that went on all night with the reporting of the results, but I'm not sure what to make of the lack of interviews. Is the campaign not actively persuing interviews with the media? I'd really like to know if it's a lack of organization on behalf of the campaign, or if the media just doesn't talk to the campaign at all. While we've come a long way with basically no MSM help, I think we really need MSM exposure now more than ever. Am I wrong?

Paulitical Correctness
01-20-2008, 06:55 AM
Yes, gtfo troll.

I kid. I wouldn't notice any media exposure, or lack thereof, because after my blood pressure kept shooting through the roof, I stopped watching television.

If it were me, though, I'd have too much pride to go on those scumbag's shows. :mad:

cska80
01-20-2008, 07:02 AM
Those scumbag shows allow us free exposure though. Believe me I'm as anti MSM as the next guy, but I'm wondering if the campaign is even persuing them or just waiting for the MSM to call HQ for interviews or comments.

Exarel
01-20-2008, 07:03 AM
All this proves is that we don't need them. Use our 2nd place to convince people that he isn't a joke candidate. Canvass canvass canvass!

WilliamC
01-20-2008, 07:07 AM
I don't think the campaign can make much headway in begging or demanding that Ron Paul get more exposure. While I have heard reports of his cancelling interviews (like with Neil Boortz on the radio) I think they would appreciate as much face time in front of the cameras as they can get.

Hopefully, Ron Paul was doing something more important last night than giving an interview though.

Rumor (and I do mean rumor) has it that he may have been dining with some very deep-pocket supporters. Threads were on the fourm last night from folks who started the grassroots suggesting this.

Should these rumors be true I hope we see their fruits soon.

Either way, the most exposure Ron Paul has gotten has been from fundraising.

I'll be contacting my email list of local supporters today to ask them to kick in something tomorrow.

nike
01-20-2008, 07:11 AM
85% of the MSM is owned by 5 corporations, and all of the owners are Neocons. We haven't had "fair and balanced" reporting in over a decade and I'm sure others would argue it's been longer than that. CNNFOXMSNBCBS Just isn't a reliable source anymore. The liberal media is a lie. :rolleyes:

S3eker
01-20-2008, 08:12 AM
They keep saying that RP placed "slightly" higher than McCain and that McCain didn't even advertise there (Nevada). What they don't tell you is that the MSM has been pumping McCain with free airtime nationwide while excluding Paul.

ItsTime
01-20-2008, 08:14 AM
seriously how dumb are people to believe a few 30 second ads can get people to vote but countless hours of fluff news will not? It is shocking how stupid the avg person is. Or how stupid the MSM thinks the avg person is.


They keep saying that RP placed "slightly" higher than McCain and that McCain didn't even advertise there (Nevada). What they don't tell you is that the MSM has been pumping McCain with free airtime nationwide while excluding Paul.

anewvoice
01-20-2008, 08:15 AM
Fred Thompson gets to go on television and ramble on for what felt like an hour to say nothing of any warrant, and we can't get one f'in interview?

Maybe HQ needs to spread a rumor that we're dropping, get on television and then make some huge splash announcement!

Paulitical Correctness
01-20-2008, 08:16 AM
Or how stupid the MSM thinks the avg person is.

Methinks they're right...

joelfarm
01-20-2008, 09:09 AM
After a busy Saturday, I rushed in the door to catch the alphabet networks and the results
from Nevada and S.C. On CBS, of course not a mention of Ron Paul, and only the top four Repubs were listed for S.C. and when they went to Nevada, for the first time EVER in these presidential primaries, they only mentioned Romney as the winner!! Not as single blurb about Dr. Paul coming in second! I did not know until I went to Politico.com At least they post the actual results.

Dorfsmith
01-20-2008, 09:22 AM
After a busy Saturday, I rushed in the door to catch the alphabet networks and the results
from Nevada and S.C. On CBS, of course not a mention of Ron Paul, and only the top four Repubs were listed for S.C. and when they went to Nevada, for the first time EVER in these presidential primaries, they only mentioned Romney as the winner!! Not as single blurb about Dr. Paul coming in second! I did not know until I went to Politico.com At least they post the actual results.

I listened to the radio last night as I fell asleep and they have CBS news every hour. They mentioned Hillary, Obama, Edwards and Romney every hour. I wonder how they would ignore Ron if they came in first? I'm pissed. Got a big group of us from my meetup going canvassing today. Maybe that will make me feel better. :(

NoMoreApathy
01-20-2008, 09:40 AM
They keep saying that RP placed "slightly" higher than McCain and that McCain didn't even advertise there (Nevada). What they don't tell you is that the MSM has been pumping McCain with free airtime nationwide while excluding Paul.

Yeah that's the biggest point right there.

While we keep talking about campaigns going broke, the media is propping them up with MILLIONS of dollars worth of free advertising. And it's the best advertising that money doesn't buy, because it's MSM advertising which is what people obviously respond to the most.

McCain and Huckabee don't even NEED money anymore. The media singlehandedly revived McCain's campaign for him. And they singlehandedly energized and boosted Huckabee's for him.

Dlynne
01-20-2008, 09:41 AM
seriously how dumb are people to believe a few 30 second ads can get people to vote but countless hours of fluff news will not? It is shocking how stupid the avg person is. Or how stupid the MSM thinks the avg person is.

I think it was a CNN poll, and there was a mention of it on the forums yesterday. But a very large percentage of people polled during Nevada exits stated TV ads influenced their vote.

NoMoreApathy
01-20-2008, 09:42 AM
Last night during Law and Order SVU on NBC (my girlfriend likes it..at least she's a RP supporter), they cut in with a news break during commercial to mention the results from the 2 states..

They showed the graphic up on the screen for SC, and they listed the top 3 candidates results...Then they showed the NV Dem caucus results, and showed the top 3 results...

Then they showed the Republican NV caucus results, and they only showed a graphic with McCain as the winner.

That was a primetime, high viewing TV slot, and they knew better than to show RP's name up there finishing so well.

Anyone who says there isn't blatant media censorship going on needs to fully remove head from ass.

UnitedWeStand
01-20-2008, 09:57 AM
seriously how dumb are people to believe a few 30 second ads can get people to vote but countless hours of fluff news will not? It is shocking how stupid the avg person is. Or how stupid the MSM thinks the avg person is.


But with 30 second ads you can target channels and demographics other than those watching news and politics. A majority of those watching any primary news is decided probably...we need to reach the other Americans while they are zoned out and tuned into some engrossing entertainment.

I think it may be a good idea to run ads on the history/ discovery/science channels and pbs perhaps. Those people have tuned in to educate themselves or seek truth in some way..

MoneyWhereMyMouthIs2
01-20-2008, 10:10 AM
McCain and Huckabee don't even NEED money anymore. The media singlehandedly revived McCain's campaign for him. And they singlehandedly energized and boosted Huckabee's for him.

Yup. We have to do this ourselves, door to door, person to person. The media will fight this until the end.