Has the media been treating Hillary unfairly?

[IceSpear]

Yes (not a hack)

First of all, Obama himself even admitted the media was in the tank against her in 08, and that his campaign used it to his advantage. Of course, everyone who wasn't delusional already knew it, but it was nice to close the case on that matter for good.

Secondly, remember "dead broke"? Yes, it was a dumb gaffe, but the media was literally talking about it for like a year as if it was some epic event. It would've been a week long story at most for any other politician.

Oh emailgate...literally nobody cared about this until she ran for president. Thousands of people in the government, including many of the now "indignant" Republicans, knew she was using a private email and nobody cared. But the NYT needed a new faux scandal for their precious horse race, precious right wing clicks, that sweet ad revenue, and to fulfill their vendetta. Thus, emailgate was born. And that's not even the end of it. Even if you assume emailgate is a legitimate issue, it would've been a month long issue at most for any other politician. Not only have they been spamming it for over a year, they've already tried her in the court of public opinion as a corrupt guilty criminal bitch who will soon be indicted, despite all evidence pointing to the contrary. Contrast it with Rick Perry literally being indicted, when the media and all the "liberal pundits" leapt to his defense and talked about how mean the prosecution was being to poor innocent Rick Perry.

I disagree with you on Sanders though. The press doesn't care for him personally, they only "like" him as a vehicle with which they can damage their nemesis. They'd turn on him in an instant and savagely rip him to shreds like a pack of rabid hyenas if he actually won the nomination. Compare it to 08. Back then they LOVED Obama AND hated Hillary, so it was double trouble for her. Now it's basically just hating Hillary, and Bernie is their only option to hurt her. Remember when they acted like O'Malley and Chafee would hurt Hillary? Remember them pleading on their hands and knees for Joe Biden to enter? And even outright lying about the fact that he was definitely running based on his son's death just to try to force him in the race? That was sickening. There's clearly no lengths the media will not go to to try to destroy Hillary Clinton.

Partly it's because some people always at least have their partisan media outlets to defend them. While the right wing media is obviously going to attack Hillary, the "non partisan" functions as their subsidiary while the left wing media is too busy trying to tear her down as a far right corporate shill to prop up their preferred candidate at the time, leaving her with no natural defenders.

In addition to Lyndon's chart, here's some more evidence:

Pundit: "Yes, the media is sexist, but deal with it"
Joe Scarborough: MSNBC was biased against Hillary in 08
Gallup poll: Hillary by far treated the most unfairly in 08, according to voters
FiveThirtyEight: Hillary's nearly endless streak of negative media coverage
Sexist comments by male pundits in 08 highlights

Of course, even if every TV anchor and columnist publicly stated that Hillary Clinton is a c*nt on live TV, many of the hacks here would still live in their own fantasy world.

[This account no longer in use.]

Except a good portion of that is from 2008, IceSpear, when Obama eventually became the establishment candidate. In 2016, Hillary Clinton is still the establishment.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Yes, Hillary has been treated unfairly for being a woman. Meanwhile, Bernie has also been treated unfairly for being an outsider with views that are anathema to the Beltway VSP establishment. Overall those two balance each other out.

[henster]

She's pretty hostile with the media to begin with. Remember the ropeline she used for the press at her events and she hasn't held a press conference in months.

[IceSpear]

Except a good portion of that is from 2008, IceSpear, when Obama eventually became the establishment candidate. In 2016, Hillary Clinton is still the establishment.

She was the "establishment candidate" in 2007, and they still despised her. And there are multiple sources showing the intense negative coverage this cycle as well.

She's pretty hostile with the media to begin with. Remember the ropeline she used for the press at her events and she hasn't held a press conference in months.

Which came first, the chicken or the egg?

[Landslide Lyndon]

She's pretty hostile with the media to begin with. Remember the ropeline she used for the press at her events and she hasn't held a press conference in months.

The media has been anti-Clinton since 1992. The late David Broder led the charge and he hated both of them until his last breath.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

There's no point in denying that an some anti-Hillary bias is going on for years.

[dax00]

She has been treated extremely unfairly. The media all sing her praises blindly following along while demonizing Bernie without facts.

[Virginiá]

Yes (not a hack)

First of all, Obama himself even admitted the media was in the tank against her in 08, and that his campaign used it to his advantage. Of course, everyone who wasn't delusional already knew it, but it was nice to close the case on that matter for good.

Secondly, remember "dead broke"? Yes, it was a dumb gaffe, but the media was literally talking about it for like a year as if it was some epic event. It would've been a week long story at most for any other politician.

Oh emailgate...literally nobody cared about this until she ran for president. Thousands of people in the government, including many of the now "indignant" Republicans, knew she was using a private email and nobody cared. But the NYT needed a new faux scandal for their precious horse race, precious right wing clicks, that sweet ad revenue, and to fulfill their vendetta. Thus, emailgate was born. And that's not even the end of it. Even if you assume emailgate is a legitimate issue, it would've been a month long issue at most for any other politician. Not only have they been spamming it for over a year, they've already tried her in the court of public opinion as a corrupt guilty criminal bitch who will soon be indicted, despite all evidence pointing to the contrary. Contrast it with Rick Perry literally being indicted, when the media and all the "liberal pundits" leapt to his defense and talked about how mean the prosecution was being to poor innocent Rick Perry.

I disagree with you on Sanders though. The press doesn't care for him personally, they only "like" him as a vehicle with which they can damage their nemesis. They'd turn on him in an instant and savagely rip him to shreds like a pack of rabid hyenas if he actually won the nomination. Compare it to 08. Back then they LOVED Obama AND hated Hillary, so it was double trouble for her. Now it's basically just hating Hillary, and Bernie is their only option to hurt her. Remember when they acted like O'Malley and Chafee would hurt Hillary? Remember them pleading on their hands and knees for Joe Biden to enter? And even outright lying about the fact that he was definitely running based on his son's death just to try to force him in the race? That was sickening. There's clearly no lengths the media will not go to to try to destroy Hillary Clinton.

Partly it's because some people always at least have their partisan media outlets to defend them. While the right wing media is obviously going to attack Hillary, the "non partisan" functions as their subsidiary while the left wing media is too busy trying to tear her down as a far right corporate shill to prop up their preferred candidate at the time, leaving her with no natural defenders.

In addition to Lyndon's chart, here's some more evidence:

Pundit: "Yes, the media is sexist, but deal with it"
Joe Scarborough: MSNBC was biased against Hillary in 08
Gallup poll: Hillary by far treated the most unfairly in 08, according to voters
FiveThirtyEight: Hillary's nearly endless streak of negative media coverage
Sexist comments by male pundits in 08 highlights

Of course, even if every TV anchor and columnist publicly stated that Hillary Clinton is a c*nt on live TV, many of the hacks here would still live in their own fantasy world.

Quoting for more exposure.

Frankly, one would have to be delusional to think that Hillary gets anything close to fair treatment from the media. They have largely perpetuated these fake scandals of hers for ratings and other reasons, and the result is a deluge of negative headlines about her, day after day. The media has almost always been majority-negative against her.

And for these reasons, it's hilarious when some Bernie supporters go around saying the mainstream media is in cahoots with her. They just want to believe that because it helps lend credence to their idea that Hillary is the devil incarnate.

I dunno, maybe it's because I haven't been paying attention to politics for as long as some of you guys, but the hate Hillary gets is absolutely unreal.

[Ljube]

I disagree with Hillary lovers here.

Sure, she was treated unfairly in 2008, but we all loved Obama then, so the unfair treatment was entirely justified. I mean, Obama was so much better than Hillary (and still is).

She has not been treated unfairly in this cycle. Her scandals are swept under the rug, her failings are overlooked. She is the establishment and the media candidate now, which makes her so much more formidable.

But at the same time, she is flawed. Rotten to the core. And that's why she's having trouble. It's not the media. It's all her. The media are actually helping her at every opportunity.

Let me just give you one example that the media are in the tank for her. Remember her speeches for which she was paid a quarter of a million apiece? Back in November 2014 I used that as my chief argument for why I thought she would not be running. I reckoned, it would be extremely difficult for her to explain why she kept having those highly paid speeches if she had decided she was going to run. I believed then that if she did that, she would be destroyed by the media.
But no. The media have not asked her a single meaningful question about those speeches. Were those speeches some kind of a bribe by wealthy donors so she would do their bidding once elected? I mean, I wouldn't let up on this if I were the media until I destroyed her completely.

So, the media have been treating Hillary unfairly positively, so far.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

For the last 25 years, yes.

[Phony Moderate]

You know, when one is complaining about media bias then that tends to be a sign that one's candidate or party of choice is in electoral difficulty. Hilary supporters wouldn't have a word to say about the media if she were clearly heading for a double-digit landslide (which, given her likely opponents, she should be), nor would TRUMP supporters be complaining about the media if he had the nomination sewn up already.

[Doimper]

Clinton's problem was being the clear frontrunner for so long - it enabled the very potent Republican smear machine to zero in on a single target for months.

[Ljube]

Clinton's problem was being the clear frontrunner for so long - it enabled the very potent Republican smear machine to zero in on a single target for months.

It's not a smear machine if they're telling the truth.

[Doimper]

Clinton's problem was being the clear frontrunner for so long - it enabled the very potent Republican smear machine to zero in on a single target for months.

It's not a smear machine if they're telling the truth.

I'm not saying that Clinton is as white as the fallen snow, far from it, but every speck of dirt from the last twenty-five years has been dug up and flung at her. Including a lot of bullsh**t - Benghazi comes to mind.

I see you support Trump, so I don't think arguing about this is going to produce anything productive.

[Torie]

In the last Dem debate, the moderators let Hillary do whatever she wanted, including interrupting and talking way past her allotted time. Bernie was too much of a gentleman to object when the Mods by contrast shut him down, or just keep talking ala Hillary no matter what the Mods said. So no.

[IceSpear]

I disagree with Hillary lovers here.

Sure, she was treated unfairly in 2008, but we all loved Obama then, so the unfair treatment was entirely justified. I mean, Obama was so much better than Hillary (and still is).

She has not been treated unfairly in this cycle. Her scandals are swept under the rug, her failings are overlooked. She is the establishment and the media candidate now, which makes her so much more formidable.

But at the same time, she is flawed. Rotten to the core. And that's why she's having trouble. It's not the media. It's all her. The media are actually helping her at every opportunity.

Let me just give you one example that the media are in the tank for her. Remember her speeches for which she was paid a quarter of a million apiece? Back in November 2014 I used that as my chief argument for why I thought she would not be running. I reckoned, it would be extremely difficult for her to explain why she kept having those highly paid speeches if she had decided she was going to run. I believed then that if she did that, she would be destroyed by the media.
But no. The media have not asked her a single meaningful question about those speeches. Were those speeches some kind of a bribe by wealthy donors so she would do their bidding once elected? I mean, I wouldn't let up on this if I were the media until I destroyed her completely.

So, the media have been treating Hillary unfairly positively, so far.

Uh, they've asked her about the paid speeches in most of the debates so far, and in many of the forums, and she's taken a lot of hits for it. I don't know what more you expect them to do. They've certainly gone further after her than they did for Romney and his tax returns, where they harassed him for a month then never mentioned the subject again for the rest of the campaign.

[IceSpear]

You know, when one is complaining about media bias then that tends to be a sign that one's candidate or party of choice is in electoral difficulty. Hilary supporters wouldn't have a word to say about the media if she were clearly heading for a double-digit landslide (which, given her likely opponents, she should be), nor would TRUMP supporters be complaining about the media if he had the nomination sewn up already.

Nope. I was complaining about the media's bias way back when she was leading by 50 points in the primary and double digits in the general.

[Landslide Lyndon]

Bernie was too much of a gentleman to object when the Mods by contrast shut him down, or just keep talking ala Hillary no matter what the Mods said. So no.

Bernie is such a gentleman that he sat there and applauded when one of his surrogates called her a "corporate whore".
Once again Torie nails it.

[This account no longer in use.]

Bernie was too much of a gentleman to object when the Mods by contrast shut him down, or just keep talking ala Hillary no matter what the Mods said. So no.

Bernie is such a gentleman that he sat there and applauded when one of his surrogates called her a "corporate whore".
Once again Torie nails it.

Please. You're more obsessed with Hillary Clinton than Torie is with his hometown.

[Admiral Kizaru]

Yes they have but she doesn't half help herself at times.

[Stańczyk]

I said yes, not because of Hillary individually, it's just that the media in general treats all Democrats unfairly. Maybe it's because the so-called "liberal media" isn't actually that liberal or maybe it's because the GOP just been so damn entertaining this cycle.

[Meclazine for Israel]

No. Hillary has CNN on a plate.

[Lyin' Steve]

When was the last time anyone saw a positive story about Hillary in the media?

[IceSpear]

When was the last time anyone saw a positive story about Hillary in the media?

Don't be a hack. Everyone knows one positive Hillary story a month is "fair and balanced."