Montana Newspaper apologizes for ignoring Ron Paul

Razmear

Member
Joined
May 21, 2007
Messages
4,023
A bit late, but nice to see some genuine regret for snubbing Ron Paul

http://www.montanakaimin.com/index.php/opinion/opinion_article/ron_paul_supporters_we_were_wrong/



Ron Paul Supporters, We Were Wrong
Sean Breslin | February 7, 2008
Montana Kaimin


Last night, Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul won more delegates than any other candidate at the Missoula County Republican Caucus. Despite the now obviously high levels of support, the Montana Kaimin did not run a single article on Paul, nor did we include him in our election prediction scorecard.

To Paul supporters in Missoula, and specifically at the University of Montana, the Montana Kaimin regrets this omission.

In excluding Paul, we stifled both his message and supporters. Cutting people out of the political process is anything but democratic, as several readers have correctly pointed out.

For some national media outlets, not including Paul might have made sense. In covering political attitudes across the entire country, honing in on a low-population state that supports a non-mainstream candidate might require more resources than they are willing or able to commit. Covering candidates with more broad support makes sense at that level.

But in the weeks leading up to Montana’s caucus, local media either did not see or outright ignored Paul’s local support. The Montana Kaimin is especially guilty of this lapse because much of Paul’s support comes from college students.

Though the Kaimin may take cues from the national media (they are professionals, after all), we shouldn’t forget that they serve a very different audience than we do. Our primary area of coverage is the University of Montana, specifically its students. When it came to Ron Paul, we failed to cover that readership.

The decision to ignore Paul was consciously and deliberately made due to the fact that Paul had not generated the kind of broad-based national support that John McCain, Mitt Romney or Mike Huckabee had. We, like other media outlets, viewed him as an oddball candidate, not in step with his party and without national name recognition. In retrospect, we now see these may be the very qualities that draw people to Paul.
 
Nice, well, better than continuing to ignore Dr Paul at least.
 
Imagine what the vote would have been if the Montana media had not ignored him prior to the election. Imagine what could be happening nation-wide.
 
Nice, well, better than continuing to ignore Dr Paul at least.

As disgusted as I am with the MSM's (and this paper's) role in ignoring RP, at least this paper has done what no other media source has done, as far as I know: admit culpability in stifling RP's message. These sorts of admissions tend not to happen, unless called out by folks like Bill Moyers (http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/btw/watch.html).
 
We have been getting pounded by Paul supporters for months but we ignored them because we are not really americans, and now that he won so well in our state, and we realize internet people are really people behind a keyboard, we hope you don't drop our paper and continue to subscribe.

In hopes of keeping our jobs, please, please keep your subscription.
 
We have been getting pounded by Paul supporters for months but we ignored them because we are not really americans, and now that he won so well in our state, and we realize internet people are really people behind a keyboard, we hope you don't drop our paper and continue to subscribe.

In hopes of keeping our jobs, please, please keep your subscription.

QFT
 
I was thinking the same thing. Keep your subscription. These words they wrote are very telling.

Though the Kaimin may take cues from the national media (they are professionals, after all),

Professionals would report on all the candidates. That is what reporting is about. You don't have to agree with a candidate, but they should get to have their views reported for the voter.

We would have had broad based support if all the media had not blacked Dr. Paul out.

I do get them credit for the story. Fox would never put that in print.

I agree Montana likely could have been won if they had reported.
 
This is the student paper for the University of Montana, Missoula. I doubt they have subscribers. It's probably free like most student papers.
 
A bit late, but nice to see some genuine regret for snubbing Ron Paul

http://www.montanakaimin.com/index.php/opinion/opinion_article/ron_paul_supporters_we_were_wrong/



Ron Paul Supporters, We Were Wrong
Sean Breslin | February 7, 2008
Montana Kaimin


Last night, Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul won more delegates than any other candidate at the Missoula County Republican Caucus. Despite the now obviously high levels of support, the Montana Kaimin did not run a single article on Paul, nor did we include him in our election prediction scorecard.

To Paul supporters in Missoula, and specifically at the University of Montana, the Montana Kaimin regrets this omission.

In excluding Paul, we stifled both his message and supporters. Cutting people out of the political process is anything but democratic, as several readers have correctly pointed out.

For some national media outlets, not including Paul might have made sense. In covering political attitudes across the entire country, honing in on a low-population state that supports a non-mainstream candidate might require more resources than they are willing or able to commit. Covering candidates with more broad support makes sense at that level.

But in the weeks leading up to Montana’s caucus, local media either did not see or outright ignored Paul’s local support. The Montana Kaimin is especially guilty of this lapse because much of Paul’s support comes from college students.

Though the Kaimin may take cues from the national media (they are professionals, after all), we shouldn’t forget that they serve a very different audience than we do. Our primary area of coverage is the University of Montana, specifically its students. When it came to Ron Paul, we failed to cover that readership.

The decision to ignore Paul was consciously and deliberately made due to the fact that Paul had not generated the kind of broad-based national support that John McCain, Mitt Romney or Mike Huckabee had. We, like other media outlets, viewed him as an oddball candidate, not in step with his party and without national name recognition. In retrospect, we now see these may be the very qualities that draw people to Paul.

F. U. I say. that is like stabbing someone, and then apologizing to them after the fact, stating that they had no idea the stabbing action would cause ruptures of the skin and significant wounds... F.U.!!!! the Key words here are "deliberate" it is like they are BLIND to how a candidate becomes nationally well knows. Well you freakin morons, he does that when you report on his platform, and his positions, and actually do your flippin JOB, this makes me so angry I want to shake whoever wrote this. FFFFFFF UUUUUUUUUU
 
Last edited:
Imagine what the vote would have been if the Montana media had not ignored him prior to the election. Imagine what could be happening nation-wide.

When you look at the caucus results verses the primary results, it appears that when people have a chance to hear what Ron Paul actually stands for they are more likely to vote for him. So, if people who get all their information about the candidates from newspapers and television got a look at Ron Paul's positions he would probably be doing a lot better than he is.
 
Hmmm... I'll bet they also gave more space to candidates that have already dropped out. I wonder how many stories they ran on Rudy or Fred? And how many votes did they get?
 
We have been getting pounded by Paul supporters for months but we ignored them because we are not really americans, and now that he won so well in our state, and we realize internet people are really people behind a keyboard, we hope you don't drop our paper and continue to subscribe.

In hopes of keeping our jobs, please, please keep your subscription.

In a nutshell. Now I hope the local people ignore their subscription renewal requests.
 
They are just trying to save their asses if shit hits the fan now. Fuck them for calling themself a journalism. No excuse for that shit. Fuck them,if Ron Paul ran 3rd party they would do the same. They are all the same.
 
Media's MO: we must blatantly ignore Ron Paul, as he threatens our entire system of propaganda disbursement by telling the truth. Everyone is outraged and our paper is now exposed in a bad light. Post-election: apologize to readers (but say RP's still an oddball) hoping to retain readership, regardless that they SHAFTED RP in their pre-election coverage that drastically altered the voter's perception of RP's electability (or that he even existed).

Screw them and ALL the newspapers all around the country that did the exact same thing. You are NOT forgiven, and deserve to lose readers permanently.
 
When you look at the caucus results verses the primary results, it appears that when people have a chance to hear what Ron Paul actually stands for they are more likely to vote for him. So, if people who get all their information about the candidates from newspapers and television got a look at Ron Paul's positions he would probably be doing a lot better than he is.

This is why I am starting to feel that the caucus system is superior to a primary system in electing the best candidates. I know see the wisdom of the founders with a caucus system as it nullifies media bias to a degree.
 
too. fucking. late.

It might as well say "HA! We so stole this election and there's nothing you can do about it"

They are all but admitting that they used their position as 'news' outlet to manipulate the election. Make me sick, especially if this is really a student paper as one poster pointed out.
 
Back
Top