The Republi-CON 'Media Bias' Myth

UPDATE VI:  "QUOTE OF THE DAY: President Obama at a DNC fundraiser late Monday: 'Have you noticed that every one of these candidates says, ‘Obama’s weak. Putin’s kicking sand in his face. When I talk to Putin, he’s going to straighten out’? Then it turns out they can’t handle a bunch of CNBC moderators at the debate. Let me tell you: if you can’t handle those guys, then I don’t think the Chinese and the Russians are going to be too worried about you.'"

UPDATE V:  "The problem isn’t that CNBC engaged in 'gotcha' questions meant to 'embarass' the Republican candidates. It’s that any serious look is a fatal blow to GOP plans and proposals, which don’t deliver on promised substance. Trump can’t deport millions of immigrants; Carson can’t raise enough revenue to fund the federal government; and the 'middle-class' tax plans of Bush, Rubio, and others shower most of their benefits on the rich. And as long as this is true, GOP candidates will have a hard time with all but the most friendly moderators."

Read Slate, Why the GOP Won’t Like Any Honest Debate Moderators.

Read also Slate, Ben Carson’s Winning GOP Debate Strategy: Flat Out Lying About Mannatech.

UPDATE IV:  "When the candidates were pressed on Wednesday to explain their “vision for America’s future,” most simply decided it was more advantageous to use their allotted time to rally their base (and bolster their campaign coffers) with anti-mainstream-media tirades. Yes, the CNBC debate was a hot mess, but any journalistic sins committed by John Harwood and co. were far outweighed by the candidate’s stonewalling. The biggest problem was not what the moderators asked but that they were unprepared for the candidates to deny the very premise of their questions. Exhibit A: Ben Carson flat out lied about his relationship with a shady nutritional company. Exhibit B: Donald Trump denied he ever said something his own website quotes him as saying. Exhibit C: Chris Christie reacted to a question about the possible financial regulation of fantasy football by lamenting they weren’t talking about ISIS—an odd response given it came after the participants were already complaining they weren’t being asked enough about the economy and finance."

Read Slate, The Republican Revolt Against the Media Is Empty, Grandstanding Nonsense.

BTW, the focus of the CNBC was "on the economy", ergo, no questions about ISIS.

UPDATE III:  "The Republican presidential candidates are right. The media does suck.

But not for the reasons the candidates complained about Wednesday night.

We in the media suck because we have rewarded their rampant dishonesty and buffoonery with nonstop news coverage. Which, of course, has encouraged more dishonesty and buffoonery.

Hence the aggravating behaviors that candidates doubled-down on during the debate, based on lessons that we in the media taught them. To wit:

Lesson No. 1: Lie, but lie confidently. . .

Lesson No. 2: Invent your own math.

This is related to Lesson No. 1, but more quantitative. Or less, depending on how you look at it. . .

Lesson No. 3: If you can’t think of something better to say, just bash the media. . ."

Read the Washington Post, The Republicans are right. We in the media do suck. 

UPDATE II:   The new Republi-con debate strategy -- lie and attack the questioner.

Read the Washington Post, A peevish pack of GOP contenders.

UPDATE:  Republi-con claim that the questions asked by CNBC were "Nasty? Prejudicial? Shameful? Now compare [them] to a question[s] posed by Fox News" hosts.

Read the Washington Post, CNBC is getting hammered because it’s not Fox News.

"What happened in this debate wasn’t an attack by the press on the candidates. It was an attack by the candidates on the press. Harwood, Quick, and the other CNBC panelists were no harsher to the Republicans on Wednesday than CNN’s Anderson Cooper was to Clinton and other Democrats in their debate two weeks ago. What was different this time was the reaction. Presented with facts and figures that didn’t fit their story, the leading Republican candidates accused the moderators of malice and deceit. . .

Yes, reporters sometimes screw up. But they have a troublesome habit of checking things. That’s what makes their statements, on the whole, more reliable than yours. It’s not true, as Stephen Colbert once joked, that reality has a liberal bias. But it is true that reality has a bias toward journalists. That’s because journalists spend a lot of time with reality. They get to know it."

Read Slate, Reality Sucks.