The Media's Plan To Ambush Ron Paul

[rockwell]

Despite the fact that Paul has a strong personal approval ratings and polls well against his competitors; the media has deliberately---and very successfully---kept him out of the public eye. That will be more difficult to do now that his campaign war-chest is packed with contributions and his base of support is expanding across the country.

We expect the media to ditch its failed strategy of simply ignoring Paul and take the more aggressive approach of attacking him outright. Now that Paul has established himself as a credible threat to the warmongering, autocratic corporate elite; he will have to be discredited through a coordinated media-blitz which will target his voting record, his character, and any other trivial foible which may incite public scorn.

He’s got a bull’s-eye on his back.

http://www.uruknet.info/?p=m37979&hd=&size=1&l=e

 

[Rivington Essex]

Not a chance. The MS media has shown no bias against him. And I sincerley beleive that.

The media is a business and there is no stroy today from the campaign. There is no press release out about anything. Compare that to any other candidate. Obama had a "My plan for Nevada" plan out and 4 other releases. The media reports what you tell them.

The campaign has released 17 stories in the past 30 days. There is nothing to report. The media doens report it.

Hopefully they will improve.

 

[Visual]

Not a chance. The MS media has shown no bias against him. And I sincerley beleive that.

The media is a business and there is no stroy today from the campaign. There is no press release out about anything. Compare that to any other candidate. Obama had a "My plan for Nevada" plan out and 4 other releases. The media reports what you tell them.

The campaign has released 17 stories in the past 30 days. There is nothing to report. The media doens report it.

Hopefully they will improve.

Idk... between august 06 and 07, mccain got 90,000 some name mentions and ron paul only had 4000. The figure was on one of the MSM (I want to say fox) broadcasts after a debate.

 

[rycodge]

I all due respect McCain came close to winning the nomination in 2000. Has it been exactly fair? No... but Ron Paul was unheard of in August 2006 until late April 2007.

I had no idea who Ron Paul was until May. Is that the MSM's fault? Kinda sorta not really.

 

[Rivington Essex]

And John McCain probaly had 90,000 press releases.

 

[seapilot]

Best media I hear is Ron Paul = money. That is powerful to the masses as those that have money comand respect. It makes him look very electable and his name is getting out there more and more. Marketing is all about times people see something over and over. Someone sees a Paul sign, bumpersticker, news article then hear a radio ad then see him mentioned finnally on the news as easily making big money for the campaign.

Now for FOX news its blatently obvious they are biased against Dr. Paul. They pick and choose who they like and expect you to like who they like. They will disapear when all thier viewers pass away in 20 years. Ive noticed CNN, MSNBC are reporting more and more about him because he will make this 2008 interesting rather than another bore for most viewers. Like it or not they are a form of entertainment and always looking to bring out the act that sells most tickets.

 

[RPinSEAZ]

The media reports who they think the people want to hear about. Ron Paul has polled low, so they report very little about him. Whether the polls are accurate or not is irrelevant. If you compare Ron Paul to other candidates that poll about the same as him he actually gets disproportionately more media exposure IMO.

 

[jacmicwag]

You nailed it with Fox but I agree most others don't really have it out for us. Pretty much we've just been ignored like Hunter, Tancredo, etc. But all that is changing with the big $$$.

Fox is even coming around a little bit but they truly represent the dark side of all objective reporting. If we somehow make the December Fox debate, I see a very confident Ron kicking some serious Fox ass this time around.

 

[rockwell]

Wow, this is the biggest disconnect I have encountered in a long time among like minded folks.

The Media does NOT give the consumer what it wants, or what it thinks it wants, and money is secondary to it's agenda.

The media exists to steer the public along specific channels. That is it's purpose. You'll figure it out as time goes on. Hopefully.

 

[Hurricane Bruiser]

Start looking for more scrutiny and more attacks. Digging up supposed dirt will be the order of the day.

 

[SovereignMN]

I'm with you rockwell. I don't trust the MSM as far as I can throw them. Back in 1996 then launched a full frontal assault on Pat Buchanan following his New Hampshire victory. Paul would see a similar attack but fortunately he doesn't have nearly the history that Buchanan did. Buchanan had been a lightening rod for controversy for a couple decades, Paul has been more under the radar. It doesn't mean they won't try though.

 

[Phenom24]

It started tonight with Wolf Blitzer trying to pin the nay votes Dr. Paul has cast in Congress on him. Dr. Paul basically said that he didn't have the authority to interfere with the affairs of other nations..

Then Wolf tried to pin the Rosa Parks thing on him - Dr. Paul OWNED him. "Why should I tax YOU to buy her a medal? I offered to chip in $100 OF MY OWN MONEY and everything..."

AWESOME!!!!!!!

 

[Pete]

Here's some dirt on Ron Paul the media may try to use:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=heaVKmBZp0s

 

[Man from La Mancha]

This why Ron should get $100 million to have the ammo for battle.
.

 

[Smiley Gladhands]

The 'silent majority' agrees with your views on the media, I believe.

I'm certain the media is purposefully avoiding Ron Paul, for a variety of reasons. First, it's the fact that he's a hell of a story. I saw mention of the fact that he raised more money from veterans than other candidates, but not as much as I should have, considering what an amazing story that is....and for a supposedly liberal, anti-war media? Yeah freaking right. The story writes itself.

The obvious bias in the debates (fox debates, specifically) is another example. He gets the dumb questions, and gets brit hume cutting him off 20 seconds into his answer and then rudy and romney get to blab about line item vetos all day long. And how many different ways can you ask Ron why he isn't running for the democrat nomination instead of the republican one?

I've seen too many examples this election cycle of either complete incompetence or outright bias, to trust the media. And it seems like the bigger they are the harder they spin.

Of course not every member of the media falls into the category of being biased against Ron Paul...however it's enough of them that I can't help but wonder about commonalities in their potential motivation/reasons.

 

[Chaos Unlimited]

Some of you are really paranoid. Do any of you have actual work experience in the media or pr? With 24 hour news they need stuff to talk about. The campaign needs to give them things to talk about. When I worked on a campaign I sent out press releases every few days. My candidate got plenty of press.

Instead of constantly complaining about the media, try doing constructive things to give them some news (eg nov 5, tea party.)

 

[rockwell]

Some of you are really paranoid. Do any of you have actual work experience in the media or pr? With 24 hour news they need stuff to talk about. The campaign needs to give them things to talk about. When I worked on a campaign I sent out press releases every few days. My candidate got plenty of press.

Instead of constantly complaining about the media, try doing constructive things to give them some news (eg nov 5, tea party.)

20 years, does that count?

The media is as tightly scripted and controlled as the Central Intelligence Agency. They select the candidates they support and ignore, marginalize or destroy the ones they don't. You naivete' notwithstanding.

 

[pcosmar]

Some of you are really paranoid. Do any of you have actual work experience in the media or pr? With 24 hour news they need stuff to talk about. The campaign needs to give them things to talk about. When I worked on a campaign I sent out press releases every few days. My candidate got plenty of press.

Instead of constantly complaining about the media, try doing constructive things to give them some news (eg nov 5, tea party.)

Educate yourself.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JPlvdSQ6cAM