POLL: Which Mainstream Media Organization is
The MOST Unreliable?
November 11-30 2008
With all of the true confessions now hitting the public about the off-kilter coverage of the election, we thought we'd ask a question.
Which "news" organization was the worst?
The Washington Post has already admitted that the paper's coverage heavily favored Barack Obama. Newsweek's editors then went on the record about their doubts about "media creation" Obama's "creepy" "cult of personality" supporters.
The LA Times--after trying out a variety of excuses--wouldn't release a video of Obama toasting former PLO spokesman Rashid Khalidi at a 2003 gala.
The NY Times has been silent, but that may be because the paper laid off its ombudsman in the latest round of lay-offs. We're only speculating.
TIME featured Obama on the cover more times over the last 42 weeks (10) than it did Princess Diana (eight) over her lifetime.
MSNBC's ratings are proof the network is not watched--and not to be taken seriously as a news source.
Pick a winner below. We'll announce the results after Thanksgiving in a few weeks.
"Which Mainstream Media (MSM) news organization was the most unreliable during the Election 2008?"
Poll opens November 11, 2008.
Poll closes November 30, 2008.
Posted by Mondo
image: dbkp file
src="http://d.yimg.com/ds/badge2.js"
badgetype="small-votes">
ARTICLEURL
No comments:
Post a Comment
Leave your name/nic.
We've changed the comments section to allow non-registered users to comment.
We'll continue like that until it's being abused.
We reserve the right to delete all abusive or otherwise inappropriate comments.