An interesting article in The Telegraph concerning the bias of the media.
I would also like to see the results of an anaslysi of ;
1) How much media coverage Obama had compared to McCain as regards interviews, news reports and media pundits debating Obama
2) How much more media time Obama bought than McCain
The simple fact is that America is not a democracy.
The people do not vote for politicians on their record as politicians, the people vote because the media propagandise the politicians they want in power.
The American system is the most corrupt system on the planet - the politicians buy air time on the media and the media then sell them to the public.
Politics should not be like advertising - and that is precisely what America politics has become.
The law should be changed to deny all politicians in election in the US the right to buy adverts on the media.
Politicians should only be allowed to have the exact same number of political broadcasts as each other on the public TV networks.
News reports should be strictly regulated to ensure that each candidate has the same amount of air time.
Celebrity endorsements should not be allowed to be publicised.
America needs a political system it can be proud of - not one the whole world laughs at.
And finally do you remember how when Bush was elected the mantra of the liberal media was 'all americans are idiots' - now it appears that the election of obama means all Americans are genuises !
In reality the simple answer is that if you vote against the wishes of then liberal media then you are stupid - when you do as you are told to do, like a well trained dog, then you are intelligent, inspirational and progressive.
Yeah right !
The constant charge levelled at the American media by conservatives during the election campaign was one of "liberal bias".
By Catherine Elsworth in Denver
Last Updated: 7:02PM GMT 05 Nov 2008
US election: Media accused of 'liberal bias'
Critics cited the tone and quantity of coverage devoted to the Illinois senator, counted the times his face appeared on magazine covers, the number of newspapers that endorsed him and accused television reporters of becoming "Barack Obama's media groupies".
No doubt many disappointed John McCain supporters will be blaming the media for influencing the outcome of the race. The Arizona senator's campaign was among those who accused reporters of unfairly attacking him, running mate Sarah Palin and even "Joe the Plumber".
Studies and opinion polls on the media's election coverage offer differing answers on bias in newspaper and television reporting and its potential influence on the electorate.
The non-partisan Centre for Media and Public Affairs last week declared in an analysis of the media that Mr McCain received far more negative news coverage that his rival during the campaign.
The Pew Research Centre also detected slightly more positive coverage of Mr Obama in the six weeks between the conventions and the last presidential debate (36 per cent positive to 29 per cent negative). By contrast, reporting on John McCain was "substantially negative" - 57 per cent to just 14 per cent positive.
Its report "concluded that this, in significant part, reflected and magnified the horse race and direction of the polls".
Studies by other groups, however, dispute the existence of "liberal bias".
A Harris Poll last week found Republicans tend to be much more critical than Democrats of bias in the media's election coverage with 65 per cent of Republicans believing coverage to have unfairly favoured Mr Obama and only 16 per cent believing it fair. Some 54 per cent of Democrats meanwhile thought press coverage was fair while 12 per cent thought it unfairly favoured Mr McCain.