Noam Chomsky and Adorno reading group, anyone? From what I see hear, it’s time again for some rigorous critical reading.
9
Suspecting bias, I decided to investigate the standard premise now that YOUTH voter turnout for Bernie so far in these primaries is LESS than in 2016. Surprise, surprise - it's simply untrue! The youth HAVE been voting in higher numbers, compared to 2016, just not as much higher as the older age-classes have. Furthermore, the fraction of older age-classes is higher than in 2016, also giving the ILLUSION that youth voter turnout is less this time. The share of the electorate of younger age-classes have gone DOWN. (Beware of misleading MSM data that is based on GENERATIONAL trends rather than age-class trends because each generation does NOT correspond to the same length of time, i.e. boomers occur over 18 years, whereas Generation Z involve just 5 years.) Furthermore, since democratic party affiliation is much lower among the youth compared to older age-classes, data from closed and semi-closed primaries ESPECIALLY under-represent the likely participation from youth in the 2020 general election (which is what's really important.)
https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/essay/an-early-look-at-the-2020-electorate/
https://vtdigger.org/2020/03/06/politifact-a-closer-look-at-turnout-young-voters-and-a-key-bernie-sanders-strategy/
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1l5fpK7ysQhQbZPv9hnZ_-PO1J1zBVPXSSQjNejTXecY/edit#gid=1189109697
11
I sincerely hope the decision makers at the NYT will read through and reflect upon the many thoughtful, articulate comments on this piece. I hope they will hear the overwhelming message.
Many of your readers are angry. They are tired of the slant, the assumptions, the dismissive tone about anything the Democratic party mainstream disapproves of. They are tired of news, opinion, and analysis always intertwined together, and always in the same ways, when they come here to be better informed on current events.
They are tired of the utter lack of curiosity, the lack of reflection and candor as to why candidates like Sanders resonate with so many voters. They are tired of a broad range of opinion spanning from Never Trump conservatives to anti-Sanders liberals.
They are tired of hearing how much public health care will cost from pundits who have never had to worry about the cost of health care. They are tired of seeing the student loan crisis analyzed by wealthy pundits who went to college when it was affordable. They are tired of reading real estate advice for the privileged when increasingly they can't afford the rent.
Please read this article, look in the mirror, and think about why no one under 40 listens to you, the Post, or cable news. Please look at what some of the outlets mentioned in this article are doing differently. Please think about your role in why a demagogue can so easily rally support by talking about "fake news."
And please do better in the future.
24
There is a certain amount of irony in left wing groups complaining about MSM coverage when it has been biased against the right for decades.
3
Yes, the mainstream media is wedded to the "horse race" model of election coverage. But the answer is not to develop more left-friendly outlets. They are likely to indulge in exactly the same inflammatory techniques. As others have noted in comments the MSM didn't respond any better to blatantly unfair attacks on such allegedly Wall-Street-friendly candidates as Hillary Clinton or John Kerry. Swift-boating anyone? In fact the cause of the problem is not necessarily corporate ownership. The problem stems from two things. First is the 24-hour news cycle, which IS due to cable news. Second is the horse-race-ish push for the scoop which is not; it's bred in journalistic bones. Deep discussion of policy positions simply doesn't give journalists a hot new topic everyday; poll results do.
5
The following comment took extraordinary restraint on my part. It needs to be said.
I
Ian Maitland
Minneapolis | Pending Approval
I see the conspiracy zombies are in full cry again. It must be the full moon. Chris Matthews is given to verbal pratfalls, he is not part of a conspiracy against Bernie. (Do I really have to spell that out?).
Did any of you bother to find out what point Matthews was "inartfully" trying to make with his analogy to the German invasion of France in 1940? It was the suddenness and completeness of the blitzkrieg's victory. It had nothing --- let me say that again to the hard of understanding -- nothing to do with persecution of Jews or the evils of Nazism. But nowadays people are thrown to the wolves just because of someone else's accusations -- even if they are completely idiotic and ill-informed. It has become a game of gotcha.
Why don't you people crawl back into the woodwork? You debase our political discourse.
9
Finally, an acknowledgment that mainstream media has in fact been unfair to Bernie Sanders.
But: Healthcare, inquality, corporate rule, climate change and such "all battles of an earlier generation"? Really?!
Surely these are more salient than ever. But this remains an NYT shibboleth, along with Sanders as "grumpy" instead of impassioned, "rigidity" instead of integrity and reasoned analysis, unelectable despite polls to the contrary, no friends except very close and loyal ones, no supporters except bros and dubious ones.... Healthcare is irrationally and continuously vilified. And one NYT scoop is that he even prefers his hotel room to be a cool 60 degrees! (Gasp!) No! Say it isn't so!
Come on NYT!
Even the faint acknowledgment in this article is far too little, too late. Yesterday, in these pages, Sanders was simply scorned (again) for commenting on the commercial media's role in opposing him. Called out on no positive coverage, the NYT now uses almost imperceptible token acknowledgement as cover for continuing to orchestrate his defeat,
When Trump easily beats the confused ineffectual candidate you are championing, we will all - most of the US - face a very uncertain future. And who will be in great part to blame?
The NYT and other corporate-owned media who will have to acknowledge culpability. As the NYT did after championing the Iraq war. Only this will be even worse.
26
I see the Matthew’s “Nazi’ invasion story is going to take on the same legendary, but inaccurate, status among the aggrieved as Clinton’s deplorables story.
I would vote for Sanders, but the Matthews parable was really better suited for what happened on Super Tuesday. “Senator, you have been running since 2016, maybe even 2012, and had the biggest and best funded campaign in the field. How did you get beat? How can it over?”
I don’t think it was because of the Nazis or corporate media. Quit blaming others
2
This is my third comment. I've learned that I need to submit about three or four comments for every one that gets posted.
The statement in this article about all the insured people in the media world (who often give us advice about health care) was excellent. Yes, they ALL have insurance! And almost NONE of them use the Marketplace - and yet they promote it heavily. I know what it's like to be uninsured and to have Obamacare. But if I get too critical, boom... in the trash.
9
@Lupito
Not surpised, I've read your comments. They either censor or DELAY posting comments regarded as threats. Through their pick short-list they determine our rankings. They can ramp up any comment they want by these tricks.
7
It's the evil of "news as entertainment" so that everything is sensationalized, sound-bit, weaponized to sell viewership to advertisers. We'd expect this from Fox, but MSNBC, CNN, and sadly The New York Times are all complicit. It's the perfect mode for Trump-success, but not much else, and it obstructs anything like a sustained, informed, educative discussion
8
In aggregate it is difficult if not impossible to find political articles (or articles in general) without an opinion as part of the narrative. Must pursue the 1. get the data or information, 2. analyze the data accepted in step #1 above, 3. provide an interpretation derived from step#2, and 4. provide implications. Providing implications is derived from the raw data and the interpretations.
At this point "Fair and Balanced" becomes an issue. There are counter-points for most stories but many on the "other side", whichever that is, aren't supported and don't make sense. Including them often is seen as an insult to the intelligence of the knowledgeable reader. Many issues are just too complicated to communicate in "30 second sound bites".
This becomes the vexing question that needs an answer. Simply providing a Fox News spin on the other side's ideas is deceptive at best, if not disinformation.
1
It's fine to cover negative things about Bernie - even Rising does this - the problem is cable news is actually helping to create the negative stories, they do mostly commentary on their shows and it's mostly one-sided commentary (CNN has at least tried to have some diversity of opinion to their credit).
It's also quite shallow commentary. Rising shines not just because it offers a different perspective, but because the discussion is at a whole different intellectual level than what you would see on cable news, it's striking when you first start watching. You'll see earnest attempts to understand what's going on in the world, evidence and data-backed analysis of the issues. By contrast, an MSNBC viewer is likely to end up less informed after watching than they were before. I'm glad the media landscape is changing, I just wish it weren't possibly too late for the country and the planet.
5
Yes, there is no small % of personal opinion vs. unbiased reporting in the media these days.
That's essentially because news is a hard business to do these days. It must earn a living and that means appealing to a consumer, rather than informing the public as neutrally as possible.
50 years ago, when I was a journalism student, the media were controlled by two competing organizations who reported news stories which ran in newspapers, radio stations, and TV networks.
The Associated Press and United Press International were pretty much the whole news spectrum, and although networks had their own news reporters, they also used many of the wire service stories.
The news business is filled with competitors these days, so its impossible to compete without tailoring news to consumers who prefer a particular perspective.
But Presidential candidates should know this. Bernie certainly didn't complain when biased stories favored his candidacy or distorted other candidates' records.
In fact, it seems a now desperate Sanders greatly distorted Biden's record on Social Security, cherrypicking quotes out of context, or made with dubious linkage to Biden.
I don't feel sorry for Sanders or his supporters one bit, as I also don't pity Trump and his supporters. They have dished out more dirt than they have received, by far.
Maybe in a new era to appear after we overcome a pandemic by working together in communities across the nation, we can reduce the distance between us.
4
So long as Bezos, the Walton family, Bloomberg, Zuckerberg and a few others have so much "free speech" money and corporate power to twist every tiny aspect of "news," bottom feeders like Trump and his crowd will continue to acquire more and more power and money.
It was bizarre over the weekend to see the NYTs and Washington Post both with stories about declining US life expectancy and opportunities -- with an extortionist health care system twice as expensive as any other developed country -- alongside their articles wildly lampooning Sanders as the new Reagan or Trump.
Shamefully, most voters will not learn of Biden's awful policy record until Trump begins to spew tons of garbage made to look faintly plausible to many because the little that is true will seem so unreal, too.
Media question: Why do most voters know so little?
15
I guess this photo of Bernie is meant as a case in point.
I've been very disappointed by the "liberal" readers of NYT. I assumed that having both smarts and education (which teaches one HOW to think, in addition to providing knowledge ) would protect a person from manipulation by the corporate media and politicians. Not so. Many of the commenters here are weak-minded and gobble up whatever this paper feeds them. It seems that education can even be a liability in this regard. HUMILITY is often lost with education. Weak minded people are rarely HUMBLE. Propaganda feeds on the human ego.
11
Bernie and his cult followers are sounding a lot like Trump and his cult followers. Blame "fake news." Bernie is blaming the "establishment," whining that it made the Democratic candidates who have no chance of winning and don't support him bowed out and threw their support to Biden. Bernie liked things when those voters who don't support him were split five ways, so he has to blame the "establishment" when he gets trounced. Bernie, like Trump, has a rabid minority of followers. He's down to 30% of Democrats in Michigan, 35% in Missouri, 17% in Arizona, 14% in Florida, 14% in Georgia, etc. Bernie's "establishment" includes African-American voters, who overwhelmingly don't feel the Bern.
Bernie gets no criticism from the Republican/Russian propaganda machine. The intelligence people tell us that the Russians are even helping him because they know he would be the weakest candidate against Trump. Even Trump promotes the "Bernie is getting cheated" meme. Meanwhile, that machine is doing everything it can to work against Biden. Rudy isn't out trying to dig up dirt on Bernie. That would all change if Bernie were to become the Democratic nominee. The mere fact that Bernie is a Democratic Socialist would be a rich source of anti-Bernie propaganda, and there is a lot of past material that would be tapped. And don't forget the stuff they would make up about Bernie. They had people believing Hillary was running a child sex ring out of the basement of a pizza parlor.
2
If I may offer some advice to the New York Times: verge outward from issues that affect the middle- and upper-class. What about bankruptcies from lack of access to affordable healthcare? What about poverty exacerbated by lack of access to affordable preschool? I see this a bit, but given the gravity, I believe you can do better. Even if you don’t like the man, at least consider better covering some of his more relatable proposals.
10
A newspaper man the John Ford classic "The Man Who Shot Liberty Valence" (1962) summed it up nicely:
"This is the West, sir. When the legend becomes fact, print the legend."
1
Capitalist ownership or not, the mayor said, “There are plenty of journalists who are class traitors.”
2
A Major election Fact I have not heard/seen from our media: In States Obama won in 2012,
Sanders leads in delegates; 346 to Biden’s 324. Can we count on states that did not vote for Obama in his last election?
6
There are plenty of issues related to journalism to discuss. The chief one for me is its spectacle-orientation. By appealing to popular click-bait instincts instead of educating its consumers to appreciate a higher quality data/view feed, modern media continues its slump from leaders to followers.
If professional journalism wants to do us a true service, it needs to expose the superficiality of most media coverage--how little real news, information, and divergent perspectives get exposed. It needs to provide self-evidently superior substitutes that will steer consumers away from what they're used to.
3
The media is a mess. Watching the MSM "moderate" debates could leave no doubt.
But, there are plenty of pro-Bernie forces out there and they get a lot of traction. Most of late night shows seem to love him. If you want to see hit pieces, look at Bloomberg. I can't see how the media is so corporatist when all I saw were hit pieces on him. Not that he was my chosen candidate for the primaries, but too obvious to overlook here.
Everyone applauded Liz going after him. Unfortunately she did so at the expense of using a chance to attack Bernie who was her main rival. But maybe she didn't want to get more snakes. Not that she shouldn't have attacked Bloomberg. But it shouldn't have been a centerpiece and a defining moment for her. She'd been ignored by the media, much more than Sanders, despite the Times endorsement. Glad, at least that they did that.
Small town, small city, and even big city newspapers are gone or have been taken over by conservatives. There used to be a diversity of opinion there.
Then you have influencers on youtube, instagram, etc. Bernie's ongoing ties with some groups like Chapo Trap House and even being interviewed by them have hurt him more than helped him. They say they want to use anger to scare people and think advocating violence, homophobia, sexism is ironic. I do think that this hurt him more than his supporters know. These sites don't represent "the workers."
The media overall is a mess. Not just the MSM, all of it.
4
One thing that the people could do is face up to physical reality about electronic communications, it's finite and must be so to be useful. The media uses natural electro-magnetic energy which occurs in a well defined range of frequencies to communicate. Once those frequencies are allocated, those are the only ones that anyone may use. No human owns these frequencies, they precede all humans and will succeed all humans. We decide how to allocate those frequencies and we decide who may use them exclusively. No person nor entity has any right to use them unless we all agree by some means to do so.
What this means is that we can easily set aside as much of these channels are we want for the use of anyone who wishes but it means removing them commercial use and from exclusive use by anyone. It means treating this medium as a natural resource rather than private property.
1
I would just like to remind readers that day after day, week after week, up until just recently, readers could count on an anti-Biden opinion article in the NYT. So, if Bernie is complaining about lack of support from "the corporate media", then maybe Biden should have been doing the same.
3
if numbers have meaning then you know this article is right on. the day following nevada the NYT had 4 articles negative about sanders. and 1 supportive of biden. all this after sanders had clearly won. After the "super" tuesday results there were at least 4 praising biden, and a couple that breathed a "sigh of relief" over the vote against sanders. It's not "opinion" folks, whether it's your candidate or not. Just know you are being made a tool.
15
IF Bernie, his babies and bullies were honorable, he'd run as an independent since he's NOT a member of the Democratic Party.
But he's a free rider, taking (dirty) money without supporting the party or its members.
He's never been a team player, only a revolutionary. He gave us trump and he'll do his darnedest to give us another 4 years of trump.
5
THANK you so much for delivering some of the first reasonable coverage of Bernie that has come from the New York Times in quite a long while.
5
The collective exhale by the media last week following Biden's Super Tuesday wins was embarrassing. As if we needed another example of the left's manic desire to depose Trump, they see Sanders as an outlier and sure loser compared to Biden. But for an industry whose job it is to report objectively, its shilling for Biden (yes, you too NYT) will only enflame more people and give credence to Trump's longstanding argument that he's been the victim of a media run amok.
5
"After Chris Matthews, the beloved embodiment of MSNBC’s establishmentarian centrism, compared Mr. Sanders’s campaign to the Nazi invasion of France [...]"
One of the biggest problems with the media are reporters and pundits, even professional media critics, taking things out of context. Matthews didn't compare Sanders' campaign to the Nazi invasion of France-- he compared the (seeming) inevitability of the Sanders juggernaut within the Democratic race to the overwhelming crushing defeat of the French in their efforts to defend their country against the Nazis.
This is an important distinction-- one which Smith and many others in the media don't care to make because it doesn't jibe with the narrative they want their readers, listeners and viewers to follow.
3
Criticizing the media sounds like something out of Trump's playbook.
2
I recently read that Biden has consistently lied about the accident that killed his wife and child. In fact the truck driver was not drunk, and police reports from the scene indicated that Mrs Biden drove head on into the truck. This information appeared in a conservative outlet titled, Biden is not a socialist, just a scoundrel. And we all know I hope about his serial plagiarism. Why don’t we see this information in the cable news or mainstream news analyses?
6
PS Am I “establishment” and “elitist” and “insider” just because I think for myself and went to college, had a good job, read the news every day, lived in New England or California? I don’t think so. Stop all the “military-industrialist complex” 60’s blabber and hateful name-calling! All you get from revolutions that don’t incorporate the other side into the solution, are counter-revolutions!
This country sorely needs uniters not more dividers, must find and build on common ground. Look at history. United We Stand...or we will perish.
4
Talk about establishment bias! The leftist punditry reflected here assumes that every Democratic voter (except, of course, those who vote for Bernie) are sheep, simply dupes of --- dupes of -- well, they must be dupes of somebody, because otherwise they'd vote for Bernie. Let us assume that CNN, MSNBC, and presumably the NYTimes are all in the tank for the "establishment" (you know, the governors, members of Congress, state legislators, county commissioners who have actually worked for decades to advance a progressive agenda in the Democratic Party) and its favorite candidate, Joe Biden. How many of the millions of voters who have voted for someone other than Bernie over the last month spend much time with those media powerhouses? Do none of them think for themselves?
Bernie won Oklahoma and Minnesota in 2016 against Hillary. Why did he lose them this year? Where is that vaunted revolutionary army that he is putting together?
Has he enlarged his base in any state that has so far voted? Ah, but that's the wrong question to ask -- because there's a conspiracy afoot, I tell you! A conspiracy!
6
The free press must include press that are biased or it's not free. The press can be expected to reflect inequities in the society with the worst of it being that the wealthiest and most selfish attempting to control the mass media. The duty of citizens is not to find good shepherds to provide them with a safe and equitable world but to struggle to make their communities safe and equitable by their own efforts.
This is actually how our government was intended to work. And over two centuries the voters have achieved much more political authority and ability to exercise it than did people two centuries, ago. The government is the instrument of society and when the citizens all participate, it easily neutralizes the inequities posed by private wealth and power.
Sanders proposes a better way, government which controls how much power people have and assures that all have what they need. That's why he has found so many opponents, he wants to change our government from a liberal democratic to an illiberal but socially fair and kind government.
1
Non-corporate populist media is an oxymoron, since public media is by nature elitist: while it aims at educating the masses, it never succeeds to attract them - which would require a self-defeating dumbing down.
MSNBC is corporate all right, but its Rachel Maddow and Lawrence O'Donnell daily shows are the most brilliant journalism I ever have experienced, with clear, non-ideological analysis of current affairs, bringing high quality writing to a remarkable level of popularity.
Bernie is boring.
2
@SA
The first thing that one must understand is that human perceptions are an interaction of what is in their minds with what stimulates their senses and must be interpreted to make sense. It means that all have biased views of reality.
1
@SA Lol! In what universe are Maddow and O'Donnell "non-ideological"?
1
please spend a little time in a library this weekend.
1
The bottomline is rallies mean very little and votes matter. In addition, most of America isn't chained to cable news stations or print media. What I see of Bernie is an angry old white man as leftist as Trump is far right, with no plans to pay for his plans and a certain congress that would block everything he wants to accomplish. Still, if Sanders has the backing, let's see it in the election booths; right now they don't seem to be showing up for him. I will support the whomever is the trump alternative.
5
I personally think Trump is not only corrupt, but also mentally unwell. That said, he is astute regarding the mainstream media. His defiance of the norms of social verbal conduct is merely well-calculated manipulation of the press. He understands that behind the convincing appearance of legitimate journalism, corporate media has the same priorities that he has - to make lots of money and maximize the power to make that money. Hence his blatant cynicism.
Entertain the little people, who feel powerless and resent the powers-that-be, with outrageous behavior, and everybody wins - Trump, the non-thinkers who just want to be entertained, and the corporate media.
3
Given the challenges in covering Trump and Vichy Republicans - the colossal amount of lies and smear campaigns (including the media and law enforcement), and the corruption, criminality and erratic behavior - I think the media has done a terrific job of keeping us informed. It's not perfect but if we didn't have their coverage for the past three years we'd be worse off than we already are.
1
The media either doesn't realize or, or likely doesn't care, the depth of hatred felt toward it by a large segment of the American people. Their anger goes beyond cynicism about what they read/hear/see to a real loathing. It is not just from the Right, as this article illustrates.
1
Bernie isn’t owed positive media reporting even though he has received his share of it. The last thing America needs is state owned media. That’s a tool of tyranny.
3
And Bernie and his base are nothing like Trump?
1
I used to watch “Morning Joe” on MSNBC, but was turned off by the anti-Sanders rhetoric and the clear disdain for any issues pertaining to the poor, including Medicare for All. Just out of curiosity, I looked up the net worth of the hosts and many of the guests that appear on this show. Here you go:
Joe Scarborough: $25 million and earns $8 million annually on MSNBC
Mika Brzezinski: $20 million and earns $8 million annually on MSNBC
Steve Rattner: Between $180 to 600 million
Donny Deutsch: Over $200 million
There you go….
15
This was a refreshing piece. I wish NYT would investigate and interview people younger than 35, and ask them why they failed to vote for Bernie as predicted. We need to hear from the younger people.
In November 2020, how does a pragmatic "centrist" choice like Biden succeed where Clinton did the same thing in 2016 and failed? If young people think Bernie is the answer, why didn't they vote for the guy?
[Submitted 1:51 p.m. CT]
1
The revolution might not come with Bernie in 2020, but it's coming, and there's nothing they can do to stop us. Time's up.
7
It speaks to how Bernie and his followers want it both ways...they disdain the media, refuse to utilize it, participate in it, then get mad because they feel ignored by it. They create a paradigm in which they are the holier than thou outsiders, hostile and mistrustful toward the systems (imperfect as they are) in place that we use to obtain and share information. It is an insult to journalists everywhere to assume they are somehow a monolithic entity, unable to think critically or behave independently.
Bernie needs to get over himself. He uses capitalism just like we all do. He has made millions of dollars by being critical of millionaires. He lives as we all do in a capitalist society. Yes it is an unfair and imperfect economic system. But his ideology smacks of hypocrisy and he risks re- electing Trump by creating divisions when he should be building relationships, bridging his ideals with existing systems, and collaborating within the imperfect system he seeks to lead. That is true democracy.
5
I'm much more worried about the consequences of the free airtime that the media happily gives to Trump to air his lies. Much more so than of Sanders not being competent or efficient at campaigning. Especially at a time of a health crisis of global proportions.
5
This is largely nonsense, and simply feed's Sanders penchant for grievance based politics, at the expense of the free media.
FACT: if you are contender for the office of president, you WILL be under a glaring light, a microscope, and will be characterized for literally everything you do, and do not do. Period.
Sanders, a career politician really should know this by now, and know that it is up to him to shift the narratives presented about him. Yet.. flinty and counter social as Sanders is, does not give him free access to shifting the narratives. THAT is squarely on Sanders, and constant blaming of the media is just a notable personality weakness (see: Trump, 7/24).
At the end of the day, candidates with low likability ratings with the voters, are not going to get softballs from the media. Sanders is definitely a low likability candidate. It is sad that is personal low likability interferes with so many of his progressive messages. He could adjust and adapt and fix this, but he does not appear at all inclined to do so.
Your reap what you sow Sanders.... learn it, learn from it, and adapt and stop whining and complaining.
4
Democracy can not be born and survive without informed and understanding citizens able to participate--in real ways.
Our establishment media is almost constantly evading and misrepresenting the real issues: people have needs like jobs, education, and health care.
That is what the people need the media to focus on.
NOT how to win the political horse race.
NOT who is going to win the political horse race.
People want to feel and be a part of the winning team, so many risk only staying in the middle of the road, and we're getting run over.
Middle of the road health policies have left us extremely vulnerable to pandemics which have re-emerged repeatedly in dense civilizations over thousands of years.
Why are we spending money on exoplanet research and yada yada yada, instead of taking care of our citizens?
2
Prior to the South Carolina primary, news outlets were falling over themselves to inaugurate Sanders as the nominee. The results in South Carolina and on Super Tuesday forced them to moderate that position. Sanders has benefited greatly from the media he speaks out against.
5
Sorry, I simply don't buy this. Using a Chris Matthews' poor choice of analogy as an example? C'mon, media personalities put their foot in their mouths routinely, and Mathews did so even more routinely.
Sanders is a populist far more like Trump than people care to acknowledge. Both complain about the media in almost the exact same terms. Sanders' primary complaint seems to be that he doesn't have a fawning propaganda arm in the media like Trump does with Fox. But the problem is the existence of Fox, not that a populist on the left doesn't have a Fox.
6
Media should not be ‘pro’ anyone, whether Biden Bernie or whomever.
Bernie is right when he asserts the media is more focused on the game of politics and trivial drama than true issues. But he has largely been a beneficiary, as the media rarely analyzed or scrutinizes his proposals. And in 2016, he benefitted by the media’s non stop obsession with Hillary’s emails. So it cuts both ways!
1
It is not the policy that's the problem as much as the nature of the candidate himself who does not work and play well with others and is not a team player. Trump captured the Republican party while the Democratic party resists being captured by the Bernie Bros. We do not need an election which at its core is a cult of personalities. Yes Bernie can win the election because of the falling economy, his contempt for peoples lives and health and people beginning to see Trump for what he really is and I don't mean a stable genius. The question is once elected what kind of president Bernie would make when Congress rejects revolutionary change for a more moderate approach.
BTW I do believe that if Bernie wins the nomination he should select a person of color as vp and if Joe is nominated he should select a woman such as Liz Warren or Amy Klobusher as vp.
M4A single payer is cheaper than Bidens plan. Still no mention of it and constant attacks against it. Studies are showing it is far cheaper.
Without studies you can see it in other countries as a comparison to back it up in the real world versus moderate unicorn fantasies. (Sarcasm because of posters on her towards progressive policy.)
6
Well I will not vote for Biden. Too many reasons to list. I’m just thankful that my grandchildren have dual citizenship. For obvious reasons.
3
A little knowledge is a dangerous thing... and no one has more than a little knowledge. Of course the MSM are profit-driven. Are You-Tubers doing their thing out of the goodness of their hearts? The real problem is the abysmal level of American education: people are not trained--or encouraged--to think. Many people can talk up a storm about many things--without saying anything significant. Much of the West is following America's lead. And Bernie plays to the ill-equipped as much as Trump does.
3
Not a Bernie fan but I agree with him that the media does not give him an even break. Many of his ideas have shown proven success among our staunchly capitalist European allies -- universal healthcare, free public college tuition, livable minimum wages, etc. For this reason Bernie deserves to be taken more seriously.
OTOH when Bernie calls himself a "democratic socialist" he paints a target on his own back. Why on God's green earth does he not say that he is the true heir of FDR and the keeper of the Democratic Party's flame? Malpractice on steroids.
Finally -- Bernie is really dead on when he complains about the media's obsession with horse race coverage. The amount of ink/ airtime devoted to candidates' policies and proposals is minuscule. This voter cares most about what each candidate would actually do if elected and how well equipped they are to do it.
Both he and Warren suffered greatly because all the media cares about is who puts out the more "effective" message and who is seemingly "ahead." As if even the experts really know that until the votes are counted.
3
Why is there no mainstream or cable media program run by and devoted to the issues of working class and median income Americans? I've asked this question for 25 years. There is simply no way the millionaires hosting these shows or the well-to-do politicos and pundits who appear on them have a clue about the stresses of living among the 90 percent crushed by health care and education and housing costs, and it shows. There are hours and hours of programs on cable business shows devoted to the stock market and how the 10 percent can better invest and shield their capital. Not a minute goes to the financial struggles of the middle class.
Until I can turn on cable news and see average, non-celebrity Americans hashing out issues and debating or discussing what works and what fails for them and their families, I'll continue to do what I've done for three years now: not watch a minute of the tedious, repetitive, selfish and banal pronouncements of an interchangeable cast of out-of-touch right-wing and pseudo-moderate blowhards.
8
I didn't hear any grousing from Bernie when the media was gushing all over him early on in his run, nor during that brief period after he had won California.
1
An outsiders network, discussed here, will be challenged to show it can support a strategy of winning. If not, its fans will forever remain outsiders. Or, perhaps, is that where they prefer to be?
Would you turn down a huge compensation package for doing what you do, or did? I’m kind of assuming you are around my age, which is retirement-eligible.
Are you somehow privy to Cronkite’s income? If he wasn’t paid an outsized salary, I’m sure he’d take whatever was offered. And who says you can’t be ethical and handsomely paid?
You can be ethical and handsomely paid. But you must admit this is not usually the way things work in this world.
3
The favorite candidate of journalists was Elizabeth Warren, who agrees with Bernie Sanders on most issues. Few journalists, except for never Trump Republicans, were actively rooting for Joe Biden.
Sanders should reflect on why Warren garnered so much more support from the demographic that includes most journalists: educated, upper middle class, middle aged, lives in a city.
3
Interesting thoughts here. While there is certainly more to Biden's comeback than can be explained by media hype, etc, I do hope to see a piece before long comparing (quantitatively, if possible) negative and positive coverage of both Sanders and Biden following their respective victories in Nevada and South Carolina. I know some pundits have noticed, and briefly scratched their heads about, the huge boost that Biden got from SC vs. the barely detectible bump Sanders got from NV. I do recall quite a barrage of opinion pieces (in particular) and reporting on Sanders that moved in a "vetting" direction following NV; interviews with superdelegates and party elites decrying Sanders, pieces about socialism, etc. Without having empirically measured this claim, it certainly did not feel like an equivalent barrage of scrutiny accompanied Biden's win (and as we know, there is plenty of material to scrutinize: the 1994 crime bill, Anita Hill, embracing various forms of austerity, etc. Granted, there were some articles about his confabulations around getting righteously "arrested" in South Africa...)
5
Well first, no duh! It's about time that this "dirty little secret" of anti-Sanderism is talked about. Although the real reason for it - billionaires who control the MSM are terrified of his agenda - wasn't really highlighted here.
But the prescription for that cause is:
"He wants to break up big media and tech conglomerates, increase funding for public media and empower journalist unions."
The need for this is evidenced by what happened with the stunning turnaround of Joe Biden. In the span of less than a week he went from nearly dropping out to presumptive frontrunner, and did so with almost not ad spending, ground operations, or personal appearances. He rode the tail wind of a media hurricane that suddenly named him "the best chance to beat Trump". Keep in mind that based upon his debate showings and lackluster donations, many voters had clearly decided the opposite. But once all the other hopefuls - besides the "un-electable" Sanders - had dropped out, he was anointed The White Knight of the Establishment, and gained its full media backing. If the media were not controlled by a handful of people, this wouldn't have been possible. The Founders penning of the 1st Amendment showed how important they thought a free and unfettered press was to democracy, but censorship isn't only by the government. A few people in charge of the MSM can close off discussion too, and that's what they did to Sanders.
But you can't silence the people completely, and their voices are rising.
19
@Kingfish52
If Biden wins, he will betray us before sundown on inauguration day.
4
“The people” is a mythical left wing entity. There are only “people” who vote, not this vague conglomerate that you are sure think exactly like you do.
By the time enough Americans figure out just how right Bernie is, it may be too late for him. However, I firmly believe the future of America is a Progressive one, and Bernie has done more to lay the groundwork for that than anyone else alive today.
19
Does anyone who remembers him think Walter Cronkite would take one of these bloated salary packages the talking heads get, to sit at the anchor desk these days for his job?
The "on air talent" get paid that money to just read what is put in front of them and specifically not to think on their feet and confront a change in the report. That assumes any of them are proof reading or even cursorily aware of what they are going to be saying before they go on air. Most of the Sinclair Propaganda network fake local reporters I see have no clue what they will be reading from the teleprompter as is proven by their not being able to pronounce words or names.
I don't think Cronkite would take the money. He's no angel. They certainly controlled the narrative in his day. But it wasn't the kind of organized propaganda we get nowadays. IDK if he would be able to talk to Bernie from an assumption of innocence POV.
5
One of the ways media bias works is by presenting a one sided narrative. You see and hear over and over again "Bernie can't win!" They never question if Biden can win. Somehow it's arrogantly assumed. The Bernie surrogates on TV are constantly asked about Bernie Broz and Bernie or Bust never about will Biden supporters vote for Bernie even though many say they won't. The "Bernie can't win" narrative took it's toll on Sander's campaign. Voters were in essence forced to decide pre-Super Tuesday. The Democratic establishment was never going to let Bernie Sanders win.
17
Or maybe “the people” aren’t as enamored of Bernie as you and he think?
@Larry D Probably not. So why the have the Democratic establishment and the liberal media worked so hard in both 2016 and 202 to undermine a candidate that no one would vote for anyway? This Vox article denies that the DNC rigged 2016 but points out the many "mistakes" made by the Dem establishment that played into Sanders hands. https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/11/14/16640082/donna-brazile-warren-bernie-sanders-democratic-primary-rigged
I'm well aware of the media bias against Sanders and the accusations that Bernie is a radical leftist.
Chris Matthews was ridiculous and I thought the man had died when I clicked to MSNBC a few minutes after 7 last Monday and saw a grief stricken Steve Kornacki.
In a general election against Trump, I am certain that the attacks against Sanders will be far worse.
And that is why I am reluctantly backing Biden.
I've see this tragedy play out many times before.
2
@Kevin Rothstein
It's not over yet.
Think about this; Why would Trump work so hard to convince so many that he fears Biden?
He admitted the other day that running against Bernie would be much harder. He was actually joking about how he'd call him communist etc...
Bernie would do Trump in like Warren did in Bloomy and Trump knows it.
9
@magicisnotreal Because Trump knows a united Democratic Party will defeat him and Bernie cannot unite the party.
@Kevin Rothstein
No Trump has worked so hard to convince people he fears Biden to get the establishment mooks almost all of whom he knows personally to put him up against Trump because he knows he can tear Biden down easily. One FTF confrontation and Biden will make himself look like a chump. He couldn't even stand up to his fellow democrats who were being nice to him.
No one is tiptoeing around Bernie and he is still in it. The DEM party, the voters not the establishment will be behind Bernie if he beats Biden. Even if Biden wins we will still have a government leader to the right of reagan.
4
The criticisms of cable news and their treatment of Bernie are fair. But there is a nuance that is lost, and that is that whatever boost Biden may be getting from MSNBC, we can't claim his victories and momentum are solely the outcome of that advantage.
Bernie had been garnering about 30% of the vote in the primaries. Most Dems preferred a non-Bernie candidate. As the center-left field consolidated with Biden winning South Caroline and Pete, Amy, etc., dropping out, it gave voters a clearer picture of who a viable non-Bernie candidate could be.
Sanders supporters are correct that certain media outlets have treated him unfairly. But it's sad to watch them go to such great lengths as to assign Biden's momentum to some giant corporate media conspiracy, while failing to acknowledge that millions of voters might simply prefer Biden to Bernie for perfectly legitimate reasons of their own.
2
Completely agree that the mainstream media is unfair to Sanders and more generally, is out of touch with what folks care about. They were detrimentally wrong about the 2016 election and I'm worried that the bulk of the pundits are just as wrong about a Biden candidacy.
16
This is something I'm also really concerned about. I feel like many of the things we're being told about Biden are the same things w we're told about Clinton. We need to honestly evaluate if we're just going down the same path as 2016.
9
He looks awful bad up there. He has almost as much trouble as Trump forming complete sentences. I’d rather have a president that does not clearly suffer from mental decline. Looks like we won’t get that choice.
4
@Smilodon7 "Looks like we won’t get that choice."
Sums up why 40% + percent of eligible voters never show up.
2
This is a pretty good article and it is also relatively balanced. I am 70+ and my views generally skew toward democratic socialism, but that is because I lived in Europe, so I hope I know what I am talking about.
However, the issue for Bernie is that he is not a good messenger for his message - for all kinds of reasons like age, personality, class attacks and more.
In my opinion the real issue is the two party political system in the US, which squeezes out any nuance and promotes horse races.
8
While I agree with many of these points and am sympathetic to antitrust in general, the last part of the article gives me pause. Breaking up corporate media solely because what they say (there is no allegation of anti competitive practices) is a clear violation of the First Amendment. The plan to replace them with public media additionally smacks of state media. Either way, we live in a country where we do not police what people say.
4
As do the critiques of Bernie for his qualified praise of Cuba and Castro, Nicaragua, and the Soviet Union while ignoring the larger context of perecution, oppression, violence, imprisonment, and murder. Additionally Bernie as late as the 1980s was a member of the Socialist Workers Party, which branched off from the Communist Party USA, but I'm sure someone who had these views when he was close to the age of 40 should simply be taken at his word when he presents a much more accessible and acceptable view of his current politics. I have far more trust in the American media than in someone who finds a great deal to praise about a Communist dictator who openly admitted he opposed a free press. Maybe some of Bernie's people should actually listen to much of what Bernie said in the 1980s and sometimes still falls into today (as he did in his 60 minutes interview where he couldn't help but offer up some positive words for Fidel Castro and the legacy Bernie clearly admires).
3
This is a column that would be a whole lot better if it would actually look at Sanders from the perspective of ther questions Maddow asked...
Is the media unfair to note that Sander's promise about young people's turnout is wrong? (They didn't)
Is the media wrong about the general discomfort with Sander's lack of a plan that doesn't rely on 'the biggest turnout in history'?
Is the media wrong for noting Sander's persona of demagoguery?
His 30 year record in congress doesn't show the kind of leadership skills that can pass his agenda, not has he shown a willingness to compromise. Is the media wrong for not accepting his passion as the primary qualification for president?
9
The problem isn’t the media it’s the media consumers. Why would anyone uncritically accept what a single source of information provides as “the truth”. It is at best a view of the facts, part of a story seen from one person’s angle. Fewer people pay much attention to traditional mainstream media; why should they when the 24/7 news firehose is always sending out breathless News Alerts. The professional media is the least of the problem when so many people get their truth from Facebook or Twitter.
2
Why is there a perceived media bias against Sanders? I think Sanders uncompromising attitude , "my way or..." is well documented as of today. As the 2016 primaries showed us, Sanders thrives on negative campaigning against its fellow democrats candidates. And once his fate is sealed he is unable to come within the circle and join forces to beat the other side.
5
Ben Smith, Saagar Enjeti and all his ilk are also pricey pundits in the end. They are just pundits you happen to agree with. For news I stick to AP and Reuters. As for opinions I talk to common folk in my neighborhood. From comments section I gather that many NYT readers are Sanders fans need to vent, now that voters are not choosing their candidate (though after NH you'd think it was a done deal :)
This article is a small but most welcome step in the right direction, and the comments here are brilliantly on target.
I consider the intense anti-Bernie bias of the corporate mainstream media to be breathtakingly anti-democratic, and a outright betrayal of the concept of journalistic integrity.
The 90% is tired of essentially being told what to think by the 10%. The smarter, younger 90 percenters realize Bernie’s “revolution” is their only path to survival, and that the MSM is against them, so they are turning to the independent news sources that are in sync with their thoughts. This trend will continue to gain traction.
It is truly amusing to see the MSM punditocracy get everything so wrong... again. Except it is not at all funny when this country cannot survive a repeat of 2016.
That is why this article is important.
350
@K.C. Thank you for putting into words exactly what I've been feeling since at least 2016, if not sooner. Its nice to know I'm not alone. Nice to know I'm not the only one who felt that pause of:
"Wait...don't tell me what to think."
Once that happened, it was like everything changed and I started seeking out different media outlets and realized just how imbedded the corporate bias was.
26
@K.C. There it is..."The smarter, younger 90 percenters realize Bernie's 'revolution' is their only path to survival..." Isn't this the kind of self-absorbed absolutism that you're dissatisfied with in the mainstream media?
Bernie has some wonderful ideas. But they aren't the only ideas circulating in the world. I'm happy that you and many others have found a voice for your energies and passions. But ideas have to survive in the marketplace. And they have to be challenged. And if Bernie can't handle being challenged, then he needs to get off the stage.
Does the media treat him unfairly? At times, sure. But he's also been given a pass as the irascible eccentric from Vermont. His ideas are expected to make sense. He rarely gets the same sort of close scrutiny that was given to Elizabeth Warren's voluminous plans or even to Hillary Clinton's emails.
The media should pay Bernie the ultimate compliment and hold him under the same magnifying glass as they do other candidates. (It would be great if they did the same to Donald Trump, who was 2016's crazy eccentric until he actually got elected.) But Bernie and his supporters have to stop crying foul every time someone dares to question the revolution.
20
@K.C. Great comment! And if you haven't already, check out The Rising mentioned in the article. It does my 68 year old heart good to see a couple of "whippersnappers" get so much right when the rest of the MSM "experts" get so much wrong.
22
So we don't have a class system in this country, we have a class structure with the mainstream media occupying the upper class.
As to mainstream media focus on Donald Trump, they focus on his every word, but do little tor seriously dissect or criticize. The mainstream media has given Trump a megaphone like no other. The media is culpable in creating the Trump phenomena and his rise to power.
On the other hand, the mainstream media has been critical of Bernie Sanders framing their coverage around his being an outsider, and of course a socialist. Impossible not to see their bias designed to downgrade the message and the authenticity of Sanders.
Example: When Sanders criticized the higher ups, and the influential former running mates in the Democratic Party, for coalescing around Biden, the media reported that was impossible, Sanders was just an alarmist. It was again a coordinated effort to assert Sanders was just a sore loser. In fact, there was and there is an effort by Democratic Bosses and influential Democrats to propel Biden to the nomination.
I have long been critical of mainstream media, particularly TV where clusters of card carrying members sit around and opinion-ate and speculate, and do little if any actual unbiased reporting. I don't see this form of the mainstream media as a creditable source of the news, but tragically influencing large swaths of the population.
8
Candidates need the support of the media to be elected. In fact, one could argue that Trump's conquest of network and cable news is the reason we have him in the White House. When a candidate's platform includes strategies which threaten for profit news shows, that candidate is not likely to have a fair hearing. This argues for the existence of not for profit news media. It is the only way to have unbiased coverage and true education of voters.
As soon as Sanders began doing well in the primaries, the threat was perceived by the corporate establishment (news, insurance, finance, etc), they organized against him and eliminated the chance that voters might understand and certainly to have access to the benefits of his policies.
7
I don't even know where to begin to describe how this piece fails in every way.
Long ago as an AP reporter and before that as a cub reporter for the Providence Journal I learned you report what happened, what people said.
As my chief in a 4-man Journal bureau in Mass. said to me when I handed him copy about a road fatality with no source for the fact that a man died.
"How do know he's dead? Were you there? Did you see him die?" the chief asked me.
When I said the police said he died and was dead, the chief told me, "Then that's what you write, you write the police said..."
It remained and remains the first and most valuable lesson for any and every reporter.
Sadly what Mr. Smith calls journalism, calls news, is a lot of blathering opinion from people who never wrote a story about a road fatality, a 3 a.m. fire, a school board meeting - about news.
No human, no reporter is objective. Not possible. But you should be schooled as a reporter to be fair, include all voices and write balanced copy.
The cable news stations Mr. Smith is so fond of? They are not news organizations. They are newstainment operations.
They take the news, which takes only so much space to cover on paper, and extend it for 18 hours a day - because TV fills time, not space - with blather, argument, and smirk, and mislead and distort giving odor to the pungent atmosphere in which demagogues like Trump and Sanders thrive.
Mr. Smith, go cover a school board meeting, then report back.
13
Sanders thrives because minimum wage is $7.25/hr.
1
@Smilodon7 Thank you for making Mr Zeitz’s point. SMH.
1
Mr. Smith, you got it right, but needed your last three paragraphs to do so. Apparently, you could not find a quote from Sen. Sanders that recognizes the same facts; I wish you had. Your readers might be left with the impression that Steve Bannon and Tucker Carlson and Sen. Sanders are on the same crusade. I don't believe Sen. Sanders agrees with propaganda spread through lies. You did not do him a favor.
6
When all of us are driven by fear it's expected to be running toward safe harbor, even it doesn't look especially appealing.
But we have to be aware of what's going on in other America.
Axios Jim VandeHei sits down for interview with Don Jr.
It's on HBO and pretty revealing.
You should hear these trump supporters who fiercely applaud to every stupid and absurd thing trump's pompous son said.
Just so everyone understands that it's not penetrating his base!
I guess they will be loyal to him till the last breath.
How we reconcile with this other America, that dead set on getting him re-elected to the detriment of the country!
3
Thank you NYT for publishing articles like this. The self-reflexiveness here is refreshing.
2
Ben Smith only told half the story. The two propagandists on the show Rising represent the Sanders left and misrepresent the truth in every episode. Krystal Ball twists reality more times per day than Trump does all month.
The subtle way she does it isn't as bombastic as Trumps lies, is how she gets away with it.
The Hill /Rising is a smear machine. Ben Smith should have completed his article, as he mentioned nothing about the reality of that show and its intent to do harm to Democrats
2
My off-topic happy take away from this article is that the phrase “bend the knee” has become a part of our popular lexicon. RIP, Mance Rayder.
1
The most hypocritical trope in the MSM were the spate of articles urging us to try to understand the anger of Trump supporters and how we have to reach out to them--not condemn them. Certainly not suggest they're racist.
Then we all turn around and bash Bernie Bros & Co, often with the NYT and WAPO leading the bash.
9
BC
We have informally timed the length of TV reports about Sanders and his rallies vs the length of TV reports about Biden. All on major news TV. Sanders get 2-3 times more minutes of coverage than does Biden. And yet it is Sanders who is whining about being mistreated. Reminds me of the whining done by current White House occupant
2
It was refreshing to read an article like yours.
Honestly, my patience and subscription to the New York Times is hanging by a thread. I have always expected thorough honest and investigative journalism, but the biases of this paper towards corporate interests is becoming tiresome.
I’m beginning to feel like my monthly subscription fee is a donation to Joe Biden‘s presidential campaign. That’s really not what I signed up for!
10
It was refreshing to read an article like yours.
Honestly, my patience and subscription to the New York Times is hanging by a thread. I have always expected thorough honest and investigative journalism, but the biases of this paper towards corporate interests is becoming tiresome.
I’m beginning to feel like my monthly subscription fee is a donation to Joe Biden‘s presidential campaign. That’s really not what I signed up for!
3
Look at these two articles. I’ve watched in horror with my friend who supported Biden as he broke down into a dementia puddle. But, the NYT leaps to defend his treatment in the media. Then, look at the photo they choose for this article. See anything different about how these two candidates are treated by the NYT? Even as this article supposedly points out how badly Sanders is treated and portrayed with the express goal to destroy his candidacy. Is this just irony? No. It’s much, much more deadly.
8
MSNBC lost its alternative vibe when Melissa Harris Perry was pushed out of her weekend gig.Al Sharpton is there as a token and like Donna Brazile on Fox News,very few pay attention to either for good reasons.So,if you want alternatives,start with Bill Maher on HBO and also some of the alternative documentaries there as well as Dirty Money series on Netflix.Even Showtime is now promoting docs. CNN tries to sound a bit different with Don Lemon but he has made some folks squirm not about sexuality or race but facts. You want a Revolution? Even the NY Times has started The Weekly on FX and Hulu. Plus,if you haven't watched John Oliver on HBO,shame on you.
2
As to a lack of non-corporate media, Ben, let me introduce you to Mother Jones Magazine. :/
4
@nolakid IKR? Nothing new in the world.
Bernie Sanders is a Che Guevara T-shirt. Just yesterday he claimed that Amy Klobucher was forced to withdraw by the establishment ...
Not as all surprising the response to this article, lots of Bernie supporters dominating the discussion as they are wont to do.
No mention in the article, and the resulting comments that I saw, about the NYT's and most "corp media" negative treatment of HRC in 2016. How does this figure into the narrative that corporate media is anti-progressive/Bernie narrative and supports "corporate shills" like HRC?
https://www.cjr.org/analysis/fake-news-media-election-trump.php
"They found roughly four times as many Clinton-related sentences that described scandals as opposed to policies, whereas Trump-related sentences were one-and-a-half times as likely to be about policy as scandal."
“In just six days, the New York Times ran as many cover stories about Hillary Clinton’s emails as they did about all the policy issues combined in the 69 days leading up to the election.”
1
@Joseph Swartz. I’m very happy for you and your family........though that has nothing to do with biased media coverage. My son is a corporate attorney who understands, and learned as a child, that it is important that we are a better society if it’s better for all.
Why do you think Biden’s a sure thing? Could it be your “bubble” ( we’re all in bubbles ) or the media agreeing with you that “Only Biden can win”. Did you believe Clinton would?
3
"What is important in the present context is the contribution of the harshest critics (within the mainstream) to reinforcing the system of indoctrination, of which they themselves are victims—as is the norm for the educated classes, who are typically the most profoundly indoctrinated and in a deep sense the most ignorant group, the victims as well as the purveyors of the doctrines of the faith."
And it's Noam Chomsky's parenthetical comment in his above observation that must be emphasized here in The New York Times.
So, this column here is exemplary as just another drip in the constant flood of "the contribution of the harshest critics" within the mainstream "to reinforcing the system of indoctrination."
Indeed, this so-called critique of mainstream by mainstream media is the necessary 'secret sauce' that makes this indoctrination complete: it allows The New York Times to describe itself as "our free press" and advertise itself with the slogan, "Support independent journalism."
Thus, when a private multinational corporation is running a news press sponsored by other larger private multinational corporations, the educated classes popularly define it as "our free press"—showing that private, corporate-owned mainstream media's indoctrination of the educated classes is complete.
7
Great article.
As a NYTimes subscriber and an American I have to add that since Citizens United blew the cap off of campaign bribery corporate media has sensationalized fear, anger and propaganda to a scientific, synthesized virus of its own nature... when what we need media to do is to EDUCATE on the scientific facts so we can PREVENT disasters from occurring or at least mitigate their damage.
The NYTimes reported on the trafficking and consumption of pangolins and the virulent environment of stressed endangered animals in cages being the root cause of Covid-19.
So why not connect the dots? Look down the street? Do some investigative reporting and connect Trump’s policies to slash the Endangered Species Act to pandemics?
And how about the gaping irony of Bernie running on medicaid for all to improve public hygiene and ending the drug war while Trump literally puts regime change and drug war refugee babies in cages and defunds the CDC while the Republican controlled Senate and establishment Democrats approve $12 billion dollars to Big Pharma to do what? Buy Congress? That money certainly isn’t going to testing for any virus. But a good chunk of it goes to pay corporate media to whitewash the story with coronavirus to scare out more money... some that goes from Big Pharma back to Congress.
We need to make it illegal for anyone holding public office to have stock options.
5
The coverage may not be completely fair to Bernie. However, I do recall the media emphasizing Biden's collapse quite well while it was happening. In the last 2 debates, the consensus winner seemed to be Warren and the media excoriated Bloomberg. The same Bloomberg who was running ads on those networks.
If Sanders was going to be beat trump, turnout among younger voters had to surge. It just didn't. In fact, it has been flat or lower than it was in his race against Clinton. Not enough. And not going to work in November. Nothing on MSNBC kept any younger voter from going to the polls. If Sanders is getting poor treatment - then vote. Unfortunately younger voters are not yet a reliable voting block even though I believe they are on the right side of most issues.
The president doesn't have to be the most liberal person in the party. We need everyone to vote. If you don't like the nominee then show up and pull the lever for your house, senate or local representatives. And understand that the swing states have democrats that are fairly conservative. I'ts OK. We need them to.
2
People were leaving because of hours long lines at the polls. Now a retiree can wait all day, but younger people who have jobs cannot wait all day. They have to go to work. When are we going to make it possible for every eligible voter to vote?
4
@Smilodon7 perhaps they need to look into alternative voting methods which they did not have when I started voting, but which many fought long and hard to get established.
2
When did "media" become a singular noun?
5
Around the same time criteria did, I think. And data.
5
@Zev When it all became owned by large corporations. See, that was easy.
Steve Bannon and Glenn Greenwald both love Hill TV. 'Nuff said. Ugh.
5
Mr. Sanders is against the entertainment-oriented, for-profit media outlets that try to stupefy the hundreds millions people.
Bernie is fighting for the free press whose objective is to inform and educate the people.
It is David-against-Goliath fight in which the Senator from Vermont has no sling...
10
Proof the coordinated hysterical attacks designed to destroy his candidacy are brilliantly effective, if your goal is to destroy democracy, anyway. Even though it’s an impossible task to counteract the national narrative set out to destroy what’s left of the free and the brave and what makes life have hope to go on, I’m not giving up just yet. Sanders2020
8
The Vice channel is a premium product itself, as it costs more to subscribe than basic cable TV. Isn't that "elite" television?
3
The Front Runner is now a incoherent man, with no policy, no organization, no fund raising, no following. Who had landslide wins in states he didn't campaign in, and lost in landslides in state he did campaign in.
A Front Runner whose key path to winning is keeping Reporters, Cameras, microphones, the Public, Hunter and children away from him.
He will also use a recliner for the next debate.
Every Democrat is lining up to endorse him, and lining up for the 2020 VP, and sadly - the 2022 Presidency.
11
CNN, NYTimes and MSNBC had been pronouncing Biden's campaign dead, with no funding and no staff. They were hardly cheerleaders for Joe Biden. It wasn't until Pete and Amy pulled out, and immediately threw their support to Biden, that he gained the traction necessary to pull off a Super Tuesday upset. This echoes the prior Democratic primary season when Sanders supporters claimed that the nomination had been stolen from them by the establishment democrats and the media who favored Clinton. The truth is that most people just don't care much for Bernie Sanders and don't agree with his message. He is not popular in the Senate and he is not popular with the other candidates. I believe Americans are tired of anger and bitterness after the first term of Trump and are looking at an optimistic alternative. Let's hope that Biden picks a good VP and that the progressives actually show up to support the democratic nominee instead of complaining the nomination was stolen again.
4
Um, no. Reading these editorial pages for the last several months, this paper clearly disliked Bernie and rarely wrote anything positive about him. They very reluctantly changed their tone somewhat when Biden’s campaign tanked. This only happened because they thought they had no other choice.
And don’t dismiss our anger. It’s very real. People are sick of working hard yet still struggling. And this Coronavirus thing is going to make it much, much worse. Millions of people have no sick leave and they are the same people who don’t make enough to have much in savings. These people will be devastated if they are forced to not work for a few weeks. People are going to lose their transportation and housing over this. People will go hungry because they can’t afford to buy two weeks worth of food ahead of time.
3
CNN, NYTimes and MSNBC had been pronouncing Biden's campaign dead, with no funding and no staff. They were hardly cheerleaders for Joe Biden. It wasn't until Pete and Amy pulled out, and immediately threw their support to Biden, that he gained the traction necessary to pull off a Super Tuesday upset. This echoes the prior Democratic primary season when Sanders supporters claimed that the nomination had been stolen from them by the establishment democrats and the media who favored Clinton. The truth is that most people just don't care much for Bernie Sanders and don't agree with his message. He is not popular in the Senate and he is not popular with the other candidates. I believe Americans are tired of anger and bitterness after the first term of Trump and are looking at an optimistic alternative. Let's hope that Biden picks a good VP and that the progressives actually show up to support the democratic nominee instead of complaining the nomination was stolen again.
1
Give us a reason to show up. Biden needs to show that he hears our concerns and he will do something about them. From his track record in the past, I’m not hopeful.
2
As a longtime NYT subscriber I have to say really appreciate Ben’s new regular columns. I never really read buzzfeed so I’m not like a longtime fan - I’m seeing it did the first time and to me fact of the column speaks to the journalistic health and integrity of the NYT. His hire is a brave, smart move by the publisher.
NYT, I hope you continue to give Ben the agency and room to provide the readership with his columns. I hope we see more new work from Ben, and writers like him. Thank you.
7
Use the run up to the 2003 Iraq war as an example of the media being manipulated by the administration. There was no questioning of any phony evidence being presented by the administration, just the dutiful reporting of the lies as fact. And the importance of being the first to report these "facts" fed the feeding frenzy. This behavior of the media continues TO TODAY. Trump knows this all too well. I contend it was the media who elected Trump in 2016; simply by not monitoring the amount of coverage hours compared to any of his primary rivals, and his rival for the presidency; Hillary. The media, rather than reporting factually, confronting the obvious falsehoods and lies Trump spouts, instead, merely reports them as if they are truths (which they are not). The media are reporting this democratic race for the White House as a horse race again. Examine your own files: where have you reported, or even asked the candidates to explain their platforms; other than healthcare? The only way this election will be fair is if the media apportions time equally. That would mean ignoring Trumps tweets, which they will never do.
16
I agree that the sporting event approach to covering politics is very damaging. In particular, the horse race component dumbs down our politics; we hear way too much about who is leading / falling in the polls.
My quibble with Sanders is that, despite his inveighing against the corporate media, it has not always worked to his disadvantage. In 2015/16, he initially got way less coverage, as would be expected given the size of Clinton's lead and his slim odds. But once he started performing above expectations, he received very positive coverage- the most positive of any candidate. Clinton, by contrast, received the most negative coverage. Much of Sanders' positive coverage in the primaries stemmed from the horse race approach. Why is Sanders doing so well and Clinton so poorly? What's wrong with Hillary? These questions dominated the airwaves. For more on this topic, see the report by Harvard's Shorenstein Center: https://shorensteincenter.org/news-coverage-2016-presidential-primaries/
5
I wish Smith had addressed the Twitter problem. Journalists are on Twitter all the time and they think the anonymous trolls represent actual supporters. This leads to false narratives like the nonsense that is "Bernie Bros." I can think of one article this election season about real, in-the-flesh Bernie supporters and that was published two days ago. Of course, it was about white supporters, not Latinx, Black, Asian supporters. The myopia of the NYC-based media is actually dangerous. The fact that Biden needed to run no ads at all in a number of states on Super Tuesday yet still won them can tell you something -- he didn't need to run ads because the media was running them for him in the form of 'news.' Nor did he have to run attack ads on Bernie, since the media did that for him too. Now that Bernie is seen as losing, the coverage can soften, since he and his support of so-called 'radical' propositions like universal health care and the Green New Deal has been successfully squashed. Honestly, it has been absolutely disgraceful watching the coverage of this election.
19
Wait two weeks. That universal health coverage is going to look much better once people realize the uninsured will be spreading Coronavirus.
4
Pretty easy to write a self-critical piece on the media’s coverage of Bernie after he’s all but lost his chances of claiming the nomination. I would have liked to see some fair coverage of Bernie while it still mattered. The smear campaign of comparing Bernie to Trump and labeling him a socialist did it’s damage, and the nytimes cannot regain integrity simply by publishing one self-deprecating article.
At the same time, Bernie needs to own up to his shortcomings in this race without constantly blaming media attention. He speaks in catch phrases like “corrupt finance system”, “democratic socialism for working families”, “Wall Street regulates congress” etc without ever explaining what he means. He may have his followers strongly behind him, but he often fails to employ the right kind of rhetoric needed to persuade those who disagree with him. And ultimately, when he loses the nomination, he’ll have himself to blame just as much as corporate media.
7
@Mark if bernie pivoted to a different narrative, one embracing the democratic party as expandingg on the New Deal transformation, he may have attracted more support from centrist liberals without diluting his message or policies. And minimizing the use of "revolution" or "socialism" when talking to some older voters might help, as well.
I believe that part of the problem is that a news media should, at some point, decide if it is an "Information media" or an "Opinion media".
I've nothing against each journalist presenting opinions. That's part of helping readers forming their own opinions. What makes me cringe is how a newspaper or a tv channel as a whole shows bias, by ignoring some informations and overcovering others.
An informational media shouldn't cherry-pick topics, depending on political opinions. It should present facts with balanced coverage, and present its own opinion about it. This would allow the reader, again, to form his/her own ideas, without preventing the newspaper itself to tell its own view on the topic.
And regarding the current primaries: I think info news media should stop endorsing a candidate. This is the job of propaganda media, not independent journalism.
5
As a long time subscriber to the Times, I found the formatting of the Bernie vs Biden coverage, of Super Tuesday results, appearing to be biased for Biden. Front page trumpets blare for states won by Joe, buried at the very bottom is a little note that Bernie leads in California (by a substantial margin, I might add), with it's biggest haul of delegates.
10
What is factual is that multiple hosts of MSNBC shows are supporters of Sanders. The victim-hood mentality of Sanders, his staffers, and supporters, gets old; Sanders is perpetually angry and aggrieved. Smith says nothing about Sanders’s vicious bullies, which includes top level staffers, and a large swath of supporters.
The big bad media, establishment, corporations and Democratic Party are out to get poor victim Bernie. His staffers and supporters never mention how Bernie uses the Democratic Party’s power, prestige, money and organizational abilities to further his own political ambitions, then discards the D as soon as he wins. It’s because Bernie knows he’ll get nowhere, fast, running as an Independent.
There is nothing in this story about the true media threat, which McKay Coppins wrote about - the largest disinformation campaign ever – on the GOP side.
The media has never vetted Sanders, which is why I find this story wrong on every level. The GOP has a vault of oppo research on Sanders –why aren’t investigative journalists digging into stories about dark money groups funding Sanders and shady dealings with family members and Jane?
Where are front-page stories about Sanders’s atrocious gun votes and NRA money, which went after his opponents in order to prop up Sanders?
Where are stories about how little Sanders has actually accomplished in D.C. since 1991? He’s so pure that he gets nothing done.
4
Did it ever occur to you that maybe, just maybe Bernie’s supporters wouldn’t be so angry if we had things like living wages, health care for everyone, paid sick leave, and a shot at a decent retirement? We work hard, same as everyone else! Why aren’t we allowed a decent shot at joining the middle class? THAT is the anger he is tapping into and it’s not going away until something is done to fix this. And it’s going to take more than the tiny tweaks that is all centrist Democrats will do - thanks to them not wanting to upset their rich donors who might have to contribute a few percentage points more in taxes so the rest of us can live like human beings.
4
After Clyburn endorsed Biden, the scales totally flipped. All of Sanders millions of dollars amounted to zippo eventhough Biden was literally running on fumes. He spent about only 10,000$ in MA but beat Bernie and Warren. Huge turnouts, surpassing 2008 and 2016, not for Bernie but for Biden. Ignore centrists at your peril. Meanwhile Schumer has convinced Bullock to run for the senate. Best news I have heard in weeks. Keep the house, take the senate and do the dirty work need to turn this country around. Sanders can sit in the senate for a few more years with the big 'I' in front of his name. He hand-waves about Sweden and Denmark (societies that work hard to keep themselves largely white) and native to their land) and he says nothing about what gave rise to ultra-rightwing parties in France and Germany and coming up in Canada too. Hint: No one is happy when it seems your taxes are paying for someone else's healthcare too. Especially if they have recently immigrated and don't look like you. Trump has already benefited from exploiting that hate.
1
Then don’t complain when that person passes you the coronavirus they couldn’t afford to get tested and treated. This virus should be a lesson for all as to why we can’t afford to have people who cannot afford to see a doctor.
4
@Smilodon7 this has been a fight since the 90s. Go back and look at Clinton’s pitch then. This is not a new fight. Some have been in these trenches for decades. We get the angst but we didn’t forget what didn’t work in the past battles.
Whatever level of popularity Bernie Sanders is enjoying is not due to the intervention of corporate media on his behalf and that includes the NYT. David Brooks? Bret Stephens? David Leonhardt? Their misrepresentation is not argued on the basis of facts. It's merely baldly asserted and stated as commonly accepted knowledge, over and over again, ad nauseam.
I think that the continual drumbeat on Medicare for All is the sharpest example. The recent Yale study underscores the back of the envelope nature of the matter. Eliminate the insurance company and pharmaceutical industry ripoff and the savings are monumental - an estimated $450 billion and 68,000 lives a year. The current coronavirus crisis only emphasizes the negative role our antediluvian health care system has on intelligent outcomes to such inevitable pandemics.
But where is the media coverage? It sides with the self-serving fantasies and scaremongering of limitless debt falsely tied to obvious solutions - solutions already working in virtually every other industrialized nation.
Why the dearth of objectivity? Samuel Clemens knew the answer to that question. He shrewdly observed over a hundred years ago that "The United States has the finest democracy that money can buy." And corporate media is an integral part of that arrangement. If you want to understand most crimes... just follow the money.
11
Trump won buy, (deliberate pun) monopolizing the media in 2015-2016. I remember when either Jeff Zucker, president of CNN or Les Moonves of CBS said of Trump, "he is bad for America for great for our bottom line". SAD! Bernie canot buy enough free media to get the same exposure.
4
I just saw Rising talk about this article and glanced over it. To the dedicated NY Times readership (and journalists): Do you know who Joe Rogan is? Do you know who Krystal and Saagar are? This is a serious question.
I should point out that I get almost none of my news from cable news. I don't own a TV, I own a laptop with an internet connection. I read the NY Times mostly because I find it ridiculous. But I regularly watch Joe Rogan and Rising.
I suspect mainstream Democrats get their news and information from very different sources than I do.
4
I don’t comprehend how the authors tagged The Hill, whose advocates are Steve Bannon, Saagar Enjeti (a Trump backer), Tucker Carlson and Glenn Greenwald (he is not a leftie!), and which denounces female candidates and sneers at “woke”, a left-wing media outlet. Rather, this seems like a libertarian, conservative Fox News channel and more corporate media, given the personalities involved.
4
Bernie has no chance. Corporations rule.
2
Bernie Sanders was doing well until two things happened. First, Trump bashed socialism in his State of the Union, terrifying Dems who then decided a socialist can't win (notes to Dems: nor can a stuttering, cognitively impaired moderate, and Trump will find something to bash in anyone). Second, Sanders (and Bloomberg) shared their fair, yet unpopular, view here in the US of equality of and for both peoples on the Israel-Palestinian issue. Nails 1 and 2 in the coffin.
6
Sorry, if including Vice in this was an attempt to underscore media companies who are on the right side of this issue, you might have included more about their background.
The founder of the Proud Boys was also a Vice founder. They got their start publishing a hipster magazine that got its rocks off being super anti-p.c. Their stock and trade is being obnoxious.
The new Vice mantra, Mr. Hertzan said, is, “The everything system is broken — let’s fix it together.”
NEW is the operative word there. Trading in corporate media for sketchy, obnoxious, internet-friendly sniping (that is venture backed) is not a solution to the problem of corporate media. It's just targeting a different, younger demographic. Let's hear about long-running, independent, and maybe most importantly, sincere, news organizations like Democracy Now,
5
Readers are left saying "so what" if broadcast and cable news are biased against the left after reading Mr. Smith's own observation that:
"the Vermont senator’s whole theory of the election — that he could mobilize a huge new cohort of young people"
The fact is Pew research says they very cohort Bernie relies on to win don't get their news and information from the mainstream media. So why complain Bernie?
The fact is that you should have been developing over the last three years channels of communication and engagement to the cohort on which your election strategy for a presidential win is premised. The primary results show you failed to get the target cohort to turn out in the volume you need.
Please stop the Trumpian whining , and get to work building support for candidates for Senate who are sympathetic to medicare for all, etc. ... if its not too late.
3
Well said Ben Smith - but will anything change - not a chance!
2
Glad to see at least one article in the NYTimes addressing the 600 pound gorilla in the room. Pretty good article, too, with two caveats: If you're going to make glib statements about Sanders "rigid attachment to the battles of an earlier generation" you might provide some kind of evidence of that beyond the cliches of the media/pundit class that cooked that meme up. The other caveat is that while mentioning Robert McChesney as an adviser to Sanders, it would help if you identified him as an important scholar in the field of media political/economics who has argued convincingly in detailed evidence and depth that the current media economic model and a real functioning democracy are incompatible.
10
Frankly, I do not see the hostility or more correctly I do not see that any hostility to Sanders was greater than to Joe Biden or any of the other candidates (except Bloomberg towards whom the media were merciless). Part of what we expect from the media is to ask tough questions of all the candidates, which they do. I think that MSNBC, which I watch, is quite pro-Sanders. Ok, maybe not Chris Mathews, but Joy Reed, Rachel, Ali, Chris Hayes, the Rev, even Ari. They invite Michael Moore all the time and they do not pose hard questions to him. On the contrary, they let him ramble in favor of Bernie practically unchecked.
3
Possibly the biggest difference between Mr. Sanders and Mr. Trump is what I see as their attitude toward American mass media. Mr. Trump seems to use it more as a carnival barker might: as a lure, a diversion, entertainment as entertainment, but disguised as something less insidious than naked propaganda (Propaganda, at its most effective, is rarely seen in the altogether). I like to think that Mr. Sanders sees it as (potentially) something far more valuable: as a genuinely informative vehicle. America’s mass media outlets are either motivated by profit making or maintaining public funding, which is why the latter eschew controversy, with only rare exceptions. Unless an American has more than a passing interest in seeking to understand much of anything to any extent beyond sound bite superficiality, s/he will be exposed, with only rare exceptions, to Standard American News Fare, which is tailored to the production of sound bites. Serious, extended, intelligent, in-depth discussion isn’t a big seller, as it asks too much of its audience. If America devolves further into a plutocracy, we can’t expect its mass media to come riding to the rescue. As Walt Kelly sagely noted decades ago, “We have met the enemy, and he is us.”
3
Certainly a rarity: a vaguely positive story on Bernie in the Times.
But, of course, the writer could not resist the establishment talking points: "His weaknesses, from a rigid attachment to the battles of an earlier generation to his struggle to persuade older black Democrats to join his revolution, aren’t media inventions. They’re good, fair stories."
No they're not. They are simply brickbats aimed at delegitimizing Bernie's platform. What "battles of an earlier generation?" Income inequality, healthcare, climate change? Just because Bernie reminds you of grandpa doesn't make him wrong, or a relic of the past.
11
Many of the comments here seem typical of the reaction of Sanders' supporters whenever Bernie falls a bit short -- it's some kind of conspiracy against him, by the DNC, the media, etc. Perhaps it's simply that the country isn't quite ready for much of what he proposes.
9
The mainstream media was baffled by white, rural, Christian America’s support for Trump, and dismayed at the support Sanders got from the multinational working class and young people. They don’t understand why most in the black community both support Medicare for All and vote for Biden. The media, based in Midtown Manhattan and inside the Beltway, largely speaks to and for three groups, the corporate and political worlds, and the professional-managerial class. Threatened by loss of advertising, the best choice for mainstream media would be to go public-funded like Pacifica radio and The Young Turks.
9
Both Trump and Sanders want fake news. They just want their own fake news. The mainstream media has an issue in that it competes to be first rather than accurate and they don't do retractions when they get it wrong. They essentially are competing with social media and reduce themselves to that standard. To that end Trump and Sanders are correct. But in the end Trump and Sanders don't want better researched news. They just want their own fake news.
7
Good article. And right on the money, so to speak.
4
You could add the Times, explicitly, as part of that corporate media. But it is also an important source of information, if skewed more toward a corporate mainstream perspective.
I used to watch MSNBC as part of a mix of media. But I reduced my viewing as they became exploitatively obsessed with Trump above everything (and I am vehemently against Trump). For example, Maddow did some very good coverage of the Flint water crisis several years ago, but has become mostly a Trump-trolling noise machine.
Then with Matthews and the rest of their crew's horrible treatment of Sanders, I stopped watching entirely.
But how about online left journalism? I encourage fellow readers to check out the many good left sources like The Intercept, The Nation, Mother Jones, or for the really committed, that old socialist standby, The Monthly Review, or many others. Often organizations that work on particular issues like climate change or corporate power publish their own information that can be very useful. It is also up to us to find new sources and turn our backs on the corporate media.
18
@Doug Also the Jacobin is another good left source.
2
Perhaps I missed it, but the first thing I would have asked Bernie, on the Sunday talk shows, is whether he stands by his pre-Super Tuesday position that whoever comes to the convention with a plurality should be the nominee. Could someone please ask him.
8
@Oliver
You missed it.
4
They did, and he did.
3
Mr. Smith could explain why polls show Sanders losing in MI tomorrow by over 20 points. He could explain why Sanders' army of young voters, to whom he promised so much that would be free for them, haven't salvaged his campaign. He could talk about how the New York point of view, on so many subjects, is foreign to those living on the other side of the Appalachians. Mr. Smith doesn't have to look to disaffected Bernie voters. He can look to a huge swath of ordinary Americans, feeling ignored and misunderstood by the various media colossuses centered in New York.
4
@blgreenie In all fairness, a prediction is not a fact. It's not too much to wait until tomorrow to see what happens in MI before we discuss the numbers.
3
I am a big fan of The Hill. Besides finding good things to say (not really that hard!) about Sanders and his supporters they also invite intelligent, responsible conservative and establishment guests as well as topic experts to make their case and illuminate. They don't talk over their guests like so many of the anchors on MSNBC, CNN, and the other mainstream interviewers do. They don't keep asking trivial "gotcha" questions over and over. Both Ball and Enjeti are sharp tacks and argue their perspective fearlessly but also fairly. They often describe "the elephant in the room" that mainstream media don't want to talk about. A great addition to the media universe.
9
I like and respect Bernie. He, Sherrod, Maxine voted against NAFTA in 1993. They support workers. But face it, Amy, Pete, Mike, Corey supporters were not Bernie supporters. Most Dems are not Bernie supporters. It is what it is.
7
The 'media' a poor name for our current information distribution. While, decades ago, news information came from a relatively small number - of generally trusted sources .... today's news comes from a very large number of unreliable sources.
The large networks have retreated to using hyperbole for every story every day. Doing so, they lose their credibility. Partisan sources try to hide themselves in a vanilla-like name, but incorporate hyper- right or left messaging. It is very difficult for a citizen to get objective information today.
One must lean on their education to be able to parse information and data. Unfortunately, because our education system has become a political tool (primarily of the left), many are ignorant of our nation's history and government processes. Mob rule is the alternative some prefer - who can yell the loudest - regardless of the truth of the information.
I do not care for Sanders policies or politics, but I respect his right to communicate. I believe in the individual and the family/community focus on what is best for them, rather than belief in an all powerful central gov't.
1
@jrgfla You have to have a supportive family in your scenario to make it. Or a community that actually cares for you. The entire point is work to make that community so that no one falls behind. You obviously had that support so you aren't even aware of the millions who are literally on their own in a community that does not care about them. This is why we create a government by the people for the people so that the people do not have to rely on religion or family to live in liberty and freedom.
1
@Laurie Communities exist to support all who reside in them - regardless of economic or family circumstances. It is not instantaneous, but I see (and contribute) to this support every day. Yes, gov't has a role, but it is not responsible for the entirety of our lives. We have control over our behaviors/actions.
The media always treat presidential elections like horse races. Didn't Sanders know this when he's spent his entire life in politics. Doesn't Ben Smith know this although he claims to be a political pundit. What's more it's not going to change. Given the amount of negative coverage given to Hillary Clinton in the media including this newspaper Bernie and his supporters like Smith crying foul is a bit of a joke. On the whole I'd say the media has treated Sanders no worse than they treat Biden and a whole lot better than they treated Clinton.
The reality is the bulk of Democratic party rejects Sanders' utopianism and doesn't believe he has a snowball in hell's chance of beating Trump which is their top priority at the moment. To quote Harry Truman (who received terrible press although he's undoubtedly the second greatest president of the 20th century) "If you can't stand the heat get out of the kitchen."
10
@John MSNBC fawns over Joe Biden because he
is the centrist candidate. There is negative coverage of
Bernie Sanders all the time. MSNBC is the worst
1
I always understood cnn, msnbc, nyt to be committed exposing Trump and the Republicans’ slide into populist authoritarianism.
But observing those same channels morph Clyburn’s endorsement of Biden into this “comeback kid” (seriously, 70 odd year old kid?), repudiation of lazy or angry ( which is it now?) radical socialists for a very flawed centrist candidate who stands for little except a replacement for trump, has me very uneasy about the prospect of having corporate Democrats fill the role of propagandists of a different flavor.
Fox and trumpism reflect deep suspicion of corporate America and the political discourse we consume in corporate outlets. The New York bias has been particularly naked in light of the California results- Biden lost because he has no message. He has Nothing to offer youth voters. Guess what? All of these candidates reflect the conservative views of a population with a narrow vision of a shrinking future. At least Bernie seems to see the writing on the wall about demographic changes coming to the electorate. Too bad there is no one to call this out.
12
I can’t speak to how media should be structured differently. But, with no intended disparagement of Biden or anyone else’s preferred candidate, the comparisons between Sanders and Trump really is a “canard.”
It is Trump’s openly malicious intent, not his “populism,” that makes him dangerous. If someone wants to say Bernie has bad ideas, I’m prepared to listen to that. In fact, I myself (while committed to voting for the eventual nominee) was more in line with Warren. Regardless, my point is that whatever else one might say about Bernie, the point of his policy proposals was, at least in theory, to help people.
By contrast, Trump’s policies and use of power revolve around harming people and enriching HIMSELF. There are no Trump “policies” that exist independent of his own private whims. This is a man who openly seeks to punish everyone from his individual “enemies” to entire states for the crime of not saying “nice” things about him.
And until Sanders shows a similarly hostile intent, he is not like Trump. Yes, he’s old. Yes, he waves his hands around and gets angry. Yes, his often overzealous supporters are a problem. But he has never shown himself to be truly “dangerous” gleefully malicious in the manner of Donald J. Trump and that makes all the difference in the world.
11
I am a non-Trump Republican, and no Bernie fan. BUT, the network media just hypes the 'flavor of the week', and downgrades the whole campaign into a horserace. The public are a bunch of sheep to a great extent; they want to back a winner, and if this week's winner is Joe or Bernie, or Elizabeth, or whoever, that is who gets the attention.
6
@Esteban There has been more negative coverage of
Bernie than Biden in the corporate media.p
3
@Esteban There has been more negative coverage of
Bernie than Biden in the corporate media.
1
If you want to talk about unfair media coverage consider how invisibly and badly the women candidates are treated compared to the men. This aspect is not mentioned in the article but I would like to see it in the future. It's time for the media to rid itself of sexist bias in language and treatment. The Times and other media have a great deal to do with why we are only looking at Biden and Sanders. Look in the mirror for your problems. We had better candidates and you didn't cover them well.
5
I predict that voters in Michigan are going to go overwhelmingly for Biden tomorrow and effectively end Sanders' campaign.
Reason: With fear of the unknown -- both coronavirus and the economic fallout -- accelerating markedly over the past week, voters are not going to be focused or interested in the "big structural changes" that Sanders promises.
Those structural changes may be needed but will take years if not decades. Americans are much more focused on the emergency that needs immediate attention. They want a tourniquet, not a long-term solution.
And once Biden is nominated, the only "big structural change" they will want is turning Trump and his incompetence out in November.
5
@Dan88
The problem with your analogy is that in all polls conducted in states during these primaries, the number one issue is healthcare. When one looks at the corona virus and the carnage it could commit around the world and in America before it is over, how many Americans, in particular, will get sick and succumb to the disease because they could not afford to seek treatment or go to a hospital?
The ONLY candidate who is committed to a universal healthcare system is Bernie Sanders. I would be willing to make a substantial wager that perhaps many are now thinking that M4A might not be so "pie in the sky" after all.
9
@Deus I did not make an "analogy," I made a "prediction."
In addition, that Americans see health care as a primary issue and favor universal coverage does not contradict what I sense will be tomorrow's outcome: Americans can view the coronavirus as an immediate health-care emergency with negative economic consequences, while at the same time recognizing that it needs to be addressed by immediate measures, and will not be tamped down in the immediate term through a long-term solution that may not be online for years.
But we'll see by tomorrow night whether my prediction has any basis.
@Dan88
Americans have been haggling about healthcare for decades without resolution. I would submit, rather than making predictions start electing people that will be committed to actually doing something about such important issues and by the way, climate change doesn't have "long term' solutions, it has to be enacted upon NOW!
2
Sanders comes through as an angry and self-righteous old man, the only true defender of American workers, with a disdain for anyone who disagrees with him. That critique is by no means a defense of the "business as usual before Trump" Democratic approach. The Sanders movement is fueled by emotion, just as much as Trump feeds on the xenophobic prejudice and resentment of his base. Sanders voters feel left out, with no future, in a rigged system in which the corporations and a few millionaires get all the spoils. The workers are left to sink or swim, and most just survive in the gig economy as health care costs rise, housing is out of reach, and retirement benefits disappear. Obama/Clinton./Biden Democrats don't seem to capture that emotion. If they could, the drive to remove the corruption and cruelty of Trump would get more momentum. But maybe they can't, as the "mainstream"/"moderate" Democrats rely on corporate/big donors' contributions.
5
@Hari Prasad
Sanders has said right from the beginning he is fighting all of the establishment including the democrats. When the big time corporate donors tell the DNC if Sanders becomes the nominee, they will suspend donations to the party, Sanders is definitely got a point. In fact, when FDR was attempting to implement the New Deal and facing immense push back from republicans and the corporate establishment, he said "I welcome their hatred". Bernie has repeated this statement time and again, the trouble is many are still not listening and paying the price for it.
The problem is why do the voters still not recognize the obvious corruption and buy into the notion of the party and their media surrogates telling them who they should vote for?
3
@Hari Prasad Biden comes across as an angry and
self-righteous old man. He doesn't tolerate
criticism very well. There is plenty of evidence on tape
of him insulting people who question him. He called
one woman a "lying dog faced pony soldier" This is
reprehensible behavior.
2
Please read Masha Gessen's critique of the Times' coverage of Bernie Sanders trip to the Soviet Union in the 80s for a proper takedown of this paper's distorted take on Sanders.
https://www.newyorker.com/news/our-columnists/the-innocuous-story-of-bernie-sanderss-trip-to-russia
She writes: "the Times, by misrepresenting the context and the impact of his long-ago actions, risks more harm to American politics than Sanders’s credulousness ever could."
22
@Chris Thank you for the link and for underscoring Gessen's point.
3
@Chris
Yes, too bad, and I doubt if we have yet to see the retraction and correction of this story from such an "esteemed" member of the media as the NYT.
It also is far from the first time it has happened.
3
Tuning out corporate media is easy enough, tuning out the corporate infrastructure that supports them is more challenging, and necessary. Movements that focus on localized industry, small business and fair taxes have a much better chance of impacting the corporate middle management in DC (ie Congress), and realigning their true constituency. We still have choices in the market, despite the rants.
You should have addressed radio, that’s where the battle really is lost for progressives. Also you didn’t mention free speech tv.
The problem is money, until the medium for information is not bound to the financial outcome of that information we will have the problems Bernie and Elizabeth were trying to resolve
4
Maybe the real story here is that the media doesn't matter as much as media columnists think. Biden cleaned up on Super Tuesday and had no ads at all virtually anywhere because he had no money. He had no ground game either and still he jumped way in front of Bernie despite Bernie's squeaker in CA. The media had very much written Biden off after NH.
Here's a theory. Democratic voters aren't up for Bernie and media just doesn't have much of an impact.
4
@Nancy
Not so. Biden didn’t need any money for advertising with the swarm of articles that came out in the main stream media raising alarm about the prospect of a Sander’s presidency. That is basically the whole point of this article.
1
@Nancy
The voters have been TOLD by the MSM and the corporate/establishment democratic party that Bernie is not the candidate they should elect and why and the criticism of him his endless even if on many occasions, not accurate.
If voters are still blindly going to follow the instructions given to them by a corrupt system, then, of course, they will believe what they are told. Sadly, real policies and how it will affect them going forward, for a large part, are ignored.
"It is easier to fool those than convince them they have been fooled".
"Mark Twain"
2
The media and a few thousand people in a few small white states led the nation down a rabbit hole for the early primary season. Opinion writers, like a flock of geese, bounced from supporting one Democratic candidate in Iowa to the next one in New Hampshire and Nevada. Super Tuesday made 95% of those pronouncements dead wrong. The Biden story was one of failure up to then.
The media lives on conflict and fear and word bandwagon, as in jumping on, seems to best describe how the media operates.
A hard news story in the New York Times on Saturday indicated that the mortality rate for the viral outbreak was between .05 and 2 %, precisely what Trump predicted(by pure accident on his part). That is less than 1/2 of what has been published. No one played up that story because it does not fit the current narrative that the sky is surely falling(and makes Trump look better). That story was off the bandwagon so it got no traction. It played against fear and fear sells.
3
It’s started already. Bernie Sanders and his supporters are making excuses, complaining that the press doesn't give them fair coverage. Depends on the press. Alternet, Dissent, Jacobin and Truthdig fall over themselves to laud Sanders and condemn centrist Democrats like Kamala Harris and Cory Booker, and, when he gets mentioned, Joe Biden, all of whom are meeting together in Detroit tonight before the Michigan primary. Jacobin heralded the day Jeremy Corbyn became the leader of Britain’s Labour Party. And they were eager to have Bernie Sanders follow in his footsteps. (No one should wish that on America.) They don’t give the Clintons, Obama and Biden “fair” coverage. Neither does the freak-out right, Fox News and company. The press in a free society are perfectly entitled to speak the truth and take sides. If they prefer democracy and free-market capitalism, so be it. Sanders should make his case for socialism and let the voters decide. If they decide against him, as I trust they will, and take the side of Harris, Booker and Biden, rather than the Harvard professor Dr. Cornel West and Bernie Sanders, no one should be surprised. And no one should put it down to some dark capitalist conspiracy.
4
You’re right. It’s not dark. This time they are doing it in broad daylight.
10
Today there was a news article that CNN and DNC have changed rules again for the debates, where the candidates will sit and take questions from the audience. Yes, audience who have been pre-screened and vetted. The bias is galling. NYT is biased as well. The article from Frank Bruni was condescending, like, "Ok, Biden has listened to some of the policy positions from Bernie" and will get implemented OVER time, gradually", which means it will not be. Today's $15/hour min wage will not buy any essentials (rent, medicines to name a few), So, even if both the spouses work at $15/hour they earn $60000 a year which is working poor in many of the gentrified neighborhoods since progressive states(blue states) with their high marginal tax rates, sales tax, gasoline tax wipes out any purchasing power from the $60,000.
11
Moderates still think this election is between Republicans and Democrats, but that is simplistic last millennium thinking.
There is a purple wave comprised of Progressives and Trumpsters, who are natural allies, towering over Biden that will wash him and his moderates and their mainstream media down the drain.
4
Yes, that’s how Sanders has been portrayed, right here, in this paper. We demand representation in government. Is that radical? We demand a level playing field. We demand healthcare. Other countries have it. I’ve experienced it. What we are for asking is good governance, fairness and democracy. Why aren’t you joining us?
15
@Fourteen14: Robert Reich (I'm paraphrasing here) says the election is between oligarchy and democracy, billionaires and the peasants.
4
You’re not entitled to representation that perfectly dovetails your worldview. That’s not how representative democracy works.
1
The media certainly bear much responsiibility for fueling the rise of Trump. They gave him zillions of hours of free air and TV time in 2014, 2015 and 2016.
25
@jeanisobel1 It was $2 billion worth of free air time.
The media profited also.
1
@Beulah. I’ve been seeing the same thing, regarding the Iraq War lead up....
And, coincidentally, Kerry, Clinton and Biden all voted for that War. Do we think the Media and Military, Congressional, industrial Complex have too much influence?!
9
The obvious media bias against Bernie has been disgusting. I can understand why people are searching the web over for an unbiased news source. Thanks for this article; the first one I've seen in the Times that addresses it. If other news outlets want to remain relevant, I'd suggest they do the same before they find they have no real readers left.
19
Kudos to NY Times for covering the beginning of a transformation that will eventually eat its lunch. Now why don't you start covering climate change before it has eaten all of us for lunch.
3
Bernie can blame anyone he wants but he lost on Super Tuesday fair and square. I’m a progressive and am deeply disappointed but winning voters I what matters and Bernie failed to do that. Progressives need to accept the reality that we lost to win over the Democratic Party, learn from our mistakes and look to the future.
7
I'm already tired of hearing Bernie Sanders accusingly label other Democrats - like a certain previous Senate colleague - as "establishment" when Sanders himself is just another egg from the same carton. Sanders poses himself often as apart -- as a socialist, independent and a 1960s disestablishmentarian -- just so he can foster that sense of being unique from others, above them, better.
It's an artifice.
Bernie Sanders is not some died-in-the-wool hippy. He's one of those people who were able to hold themselves out as such half a century ago but come to discover they've become the same as the ones they're supposed to hate. He's establishment all the way, baby.
And he's also not some cuddly grandpa, not some teddy bear. In short, for the purposes of this monumental race, Sanders is not Bernie. And the media better start now regarding him as Sanders and do so shining critical searchlights into who he truly is and has done, as the news has been doing with all the other politicians in this landmark election.
7
Rachel Maddow is not a "progressive". She was back when she hosted "Air America". But that was then.
Now she is a neo-liberal "centrist" who just does not speak truth to power. She is Exhibit A in how corporate media co-opts critical voices and remakes them into a chorus of the status-quo. It is about greed, not the common good.
19
@TheOtherSide
I wonder if that might have anything to do with her $7 million a year salary? You think?
3
This is not the right frame. The media is right to question Bernie.
Bernie is part of the long American tradition of the flim-flam man. He is selling something that he knows can't be delivered, in the hope of having desperate people send him power (instead of the usual money). His last name could be Madoff rather than Sanders.
He's basically selling 'free' everything, healthcare, college education, the green deal, and so forth, this supposedly supported by tax revenues that don't even generate 20% of the cost of his plans.
If you look at the cost per household of all his giveaways, it exceeds that of just giving everyone a free Cadillac.
Free Cadillacs! What's to be suspicious of ?
5
We are merely asking for fairness. Bernie has been ‘vetted’ for six years. There’s a difference between questioning with equal levels of respect and increasingly hysterical, blatant attacks designed specifically to destroy a candidacy.
15
If I were able to post here, I could show you exactly Sanders plan for paying for everything. Just like they have in France, Japan and Germany, who also have universal healthcare. I know. I’ve used it in those countries. That you believed Clinton, and everyone serving the DNC, that healthcare for Americans is pie in the sky is proof of how misleading and effective this propaganda is. Your country can afford to give you and me healthcare, and we deserve it. It’s what good governance does.
15
@Time for a reboot
Your response here is perfect proof of the influence of media bias. I have not seen a single article in this newspaper outlining the specifics of Bernie Sanders plans.
Before parroting right wing and neo liberal talking points about how Sanders plans are unrealistic, I suggest you go to his website, there’s a specific link there that will lead you to detailed explanations, along with links to articles in academic publications explaining the feasibility of his tax plans.
2
I’m surprised to see a column about alternative, independent news media without any mention of Democracy Now with Amy Goodman or the TYT Network. Why is it so hard to see past corporate influenced media? There are real progressives out there who are doing great work.
15
@Sara Staley
Alternative publications are omitted from this article. Jeffrey St. Clair and the late, great Alexander Cockburn began publication of CounterPunch in 1993 as an antidote to the corporatization of The Nation Magazine. Current Affairs is a beautifully published leftoid magazine as well. Nor is there mention of listener sponsored Pacifica Radio which began in 1960 and endures despite repeated assaults on it license to broadcast
5
@Sara Staley: Agreed - let's toss in The Nation, Mother Jones and Pacifica Radio!
2
Ben mentioned TYTs. He did not mention Mother Jones Magazine. :/
1
This is an important subject to revisit regularly.
It's difficult for me to evaluate the motives of the various news organizations in this era. So many voters are primarily interested in nominating a candidate that can defeat President Trump and most feel Biden has the best chance of doing that. It seems that news outlets are generally reflecting that anxiety.
One way in which the news media has sought to denigrate Bernie Sanders is to vocally and relentlessly blame him for the online abuse perpetrated by a subset of his supporters (assuming they actually do support him). Rachel Maddow asked him about it in her recent interview with him, and then the following evening she asked Elizabeth Warren about it in an interview with her. Warren predictably harshly criticized him, as she had done previously, but didn't offer a solution as to how to stop what he can't control. There has been the suggestion that attracting such supporters must indicate that there is something wrong with Bernie himself. None of the other candidates, not even Trump, is held responsible for the online behavior of people they don't know at all.
20
@CH while I’ve seen countless stories and comments referencing the “Bernie Bros” and their supposed vitriol, both this cycle and back in 2016, I have yet to see an actual example, whether a quote, or a screenshot of a tweet or DM that illustrates it. Even the 1500 word Bernie Bro expose in this paper never actually gives any examples of the behavior it purports to be about. The worst thing I’ve seen Sanders supporters say in comments is that a op ed writer is a corporate shill and I don’t think that really counts as vitriol. Overwhelmingly Sanders supporters in the Times comments section are thoughtful and respectful. In real life, I am surrounded by Sanders supporters that are kind, loving, nice people. I am 42, and most of the women I know, educated, feminist women, all support Bernie (would they really do this for someone who supported toxic masculinity online?).
I think the Bernie Bros thing was developed by Clinton’s campaign as a wedge, and because it seemed to work, it’s still a thing. If I’m wrong I’d absolutely love to know it, please direct me to somewhere where I could actually see some of this hateful vitriol with my own eyes.
4
Sanders’ problems have nothing to do with the “media” - they have to do with the problem every self-declared “socialist” has ever had running for president; they have to do with his religion - this Jew will not cast a primary vote for a Jew after Trump has made the swastika a respectable political symbol ...
And they have to do with 1972.
For those who don’t recall or weren’t here - Richard Nixon’s Watergate crimes had been exposed before Election Day.
But he had painted moderate Sen. George McGovern, his Democratic opponent a “socialist” for calling for the immediate end to US military involvement in Viet Nam.
McGovern won Massachusetts - every other state went to Nixon.
We know of most of Trump’s crimes - and his erratic behavior - and his desire to be king of the US.
We, who lost out hearts in 1972, the Boomers, who will hold the largest single chunk of the electorate this time (and for the last time in a presidential cycle) know Sanders is not electable, though he might make a fine president.
And, when it comes to bone fides, we must remember who Barack Obama chose to be his vice president.
Joe isn’t a perfect candidate - he’s moderate - and maybe that’s what this nation needs right now.
McG ‘72/Joe 2020.
It isn’t hindsight- it’s necessary.
The media called Nader a spoiler. They called Kucinich a spoiler. They called Sanders a spoiler. In fact what is 'spoiled' is the system, rotten to the core with corruption, conflicts of interest, too-big-to-fail corporations. The list could go on and on. I don't (and I won't) be made to feel one bit guilty for voting for someone who reflects my political values instead of for someone who represents the values of the one percent.
12
@farhorizons
Well, quite a narrative you spin here, horizens. But you left out the punch line: people like you chose the personal satisfaction of being 'right' over collective responsibility. The consequences are what we are facing now, with a truly dangerous president--as opposed to what likely have been a flawed but hardly toxic one. You and your fellow purists share this with Trump: it's all about you.
The mainstream media, especially cable news, including the disappointing MSNBC, has forgotten that they should cover the news as unbiased as is possible. Present the facts and let the viewers decide. Amy Goodman tries to do that; she still presented stories from all over the world, not just a one track rant about Trump and Russia for a year. Democracy Now was pulled from my local community channel that carried her. The PBS News Hour seems to make an effort to be partly just factual. But so much is about what is left out. If you can seldom read or watch a story about an important labor strike, isn’t that biased, also? Regarding Sanders, nighttime MSNBC has been noticeably biased against him for some time. I started watching more of CNN, to try to get away from what sounded often like pure snark. Why watch at all? After a long day of working hard, it is easier to flip channels looking for some real news. Will have to check out the YouTube channels.
12
I do not have a TV and my life is better for it. However, I did go to a friend's house on super Tuesday to watch the returns on MSNBC. Even before the polls had closed in many western states all of the pundits and on air commentators were so blatantly anti-Sanders and pushing the Biden surge so hard on the thinnest of early returns I found it disgusting. Rachel Maddow who is so strong on her own show raised a few points against the surge but it was weak overall. It was a perfect storm with huge numbers of undecided voters at the last moment, endorsements from the party's establishment and media bias. Bernie got ambushed and left for dead by poor turnout by his young "supporters". Now everyone can remember him for his heuristic value.
6
Regardless or anything MSNBC did or didn't do on Super Tuesday, Biden DID get the most votes and Bernie's supporters DIDN'T turn out. As much as anyone likes Bernie, he is not turning out the vote necessary to get him elected in a rigged process.
4
Proof the coordinated hysterical attacks designed to destroy his candidacy are brilliantly effective, if your goal is to destroy democracy, anyway.
1
Finally a piece in the mainstream media that questions its own conventional wisdom on Sanders in a thoughtful and intelligent way. Good for the authors, and good for the Times.
5
Why is it ok for Bernie to slam the media but not ok for Trump to do it?
4
@Alex Mazon Sanders critique is that the media is corporate-owned and therefore corporate-aligned, and he's correct. Trump's critique is that everything that reflects poorly on him is "fake news", which is not correct. Frankly, Trump would prefer an authoritarian style media landscape in the style of Russia or Turkey. Sanders would prefer a media that was un-beholden to corporate interest. Trump is willing to block journalists who have written critical pieces from White House access. Trump's specific rhetoric is also much more dangerous in its implicit support of violence. Do you really not see a difference?
8
@Alex Mazon because when Trump slams the media it is an act of naked self interest, an obfuscation of the truth, and an attempt to undermine investigation of his actions. When Bernie criticizes the media, it is an attempt to illustrate the bias of a corporate-owned system that is more interested in preserving the status quo than pushing for the public good.
5
Because Bernie has integrity & Trump has none.
2
Money out of politics and fair and balanced news might just save the world. Bernie or bust!!
8
Establishment Democrats are making the same mistake they made in 2016, even worse because Biden is a weaker candidate than Hillary Clinton. We can only hope that in the one-on-one debates that Bernie can overcome both corporate media bias and the bias of the corporate Democrats.
14
Finally a rational and unbiased explanation of why Bernie criticizes the corporate media. Just like the Fox network is the propaganda outlet for the Republicans, MSNBC has become the same for the DNC. The end result: very little objective reporting.
5
Finally! I know your overriding focus is to stay in business but it’s nice to see an acknowledgment of a problem that exists in the media. Capitalism corrupts the media.
5
To paraphrase a verse from the Bible, "The pundits have eaten sour grapes and the children's teeth are set on edge."
3
Thank you for a well researched article on why so many of us have abandoned the MSM as a source for honest and accurate journalism.
Worse than 2016, the current attacks based on misrepresentation and lies against Sanders is both disturbing and predictable. Elite Dems will do anything to continue their gravy train at the expense of us all.
It’s not just what they print but what they don’t. The MSM has mostly ignored Biden’s abysmal history and record and suppressed coverage of his quite obvious cognitive decline. It’s alarming to observe his confusion, disorientation and emotional volatility. And perhaps more alarming to see that the Times and all the MSM refuse to cover it.
Even with a good mind and in good times Biden’s incrementalism would be the wrong approach for our country. To be clear, for those of us who live in relative comfort, gradual change is a welcome and convenient approach.
But for the growing number of Americans who struggle with low income or in poverty, those with inadequate or no health insurance, and those with crippling student debt, gradual change with Biden is an insult to their everyday struggle.
16
The greatest insight provided by the Times' televising of their non-choice of a Democratic endorsement was not related to process, but the individual biographies of those at the table making such an influential decision. Take some time and scan the educational and professional backgrounds of the editorial board members--we expect these people to understand what quotidian life is like for working and middle-class Americans?
8
The logic deployed by the authors here is similar to what supporters of Fox News and Breitbart news use: the mainstream media does not represent the views of the folks on the extreme right, and therefore they needed to build their own media network. Bernie is saying the same thing now. Just as mainstream media has a responsibility to not give a platform to extreme right, xenophobic views, they also have a responsibility to deny the platform to extreme left voices that are irresponsible and will result in social unrest. There is a very good reason so many moderate voters are coming out to vote for Biden.
1
There is such a thing as Nom-corporate media. They’re called NPR and PBS. And they report the same facts the corporate media do.
A person who calls facts he doesn’t like “Fake news” should not be President. A person who say the media is the enemy of the people should not be President. We need someone who understands the importance of media that print things the powerful don't like.
6
@Doug K If you think NPR is non-corporate, you haven't been paying attention. Once, maybe, but no longer. Pacifica Radio is maybe the one independent (non-corporate) radio station remaining.
6
Just shows how terrified both left and right wing establishments are of anyone who speaks unvarnished truth. It appears that money — having it or not having it — is the real determining factor. As it always has been.
4
I wish I could say this was refreshing, but it isn't. Consider that the Sanders clip was from 1988... yep, 1988! Maybe I'm too old, but I remember when "independent news" was real on the major TV networks. Heck, we even had a movie, "Network" about how that changed into revenue generating "news".
Blame the media all you want, they do have culpability, but look into the mirror. Do you look deeper into stories from other sources? Do you support public media? Do you subscribe to independent print media? Do you look for other sources of unbiased news than what's on cable?
This story has been going on for decades now. Most media outlets are owned by companies with right leaning agendas. Don't like it, look harder and support independent news organizations. Pay attention to what the FCC is doing and has done. Become educated and participate in more than 30 second sound bites.
9
Many years ago I took a few well spent hours reading Noam Chomsky's "Manufacturing Consent" in which I came to understand some of the ways in which the corporate media manipulates public opinion, but more importantly, how it does so unconsciously, by dint of its very incentives for attention and promotion. More importantly, he outlines the motivations of the corporate media.
As the corporate media is also very much involved in what we might call the Public Relations industry, another book I would recommend is Stuart Owen's PR, a history of the industry.
4
@Jack Shultz
Regarding DJT's ascendancy in the media, I recommend "Audience of One" by James Poniewozik.
2
@Bonnie Thank you for the recommendation
Yes, yes. The mainstream is definitely anti-Bernie. Recall that, in 2016, on the eve of the California primary that was most significant to Bernie's chances at the upcoming convention given the close race with Hilary, the entire mainstream media proclaimed that Hilary secured the nomination despite the fact thta she had yet to win the necessary delegates. But the anti-Bernie bias pales in comparison to the negative and pervasive onslaught against President Trump.
6
Just to let you know: POLLS do not show reality. I've got a phone call to participate in a poll. I chose not to. Most Americans want and need fundamental change. If Biden gets the nominee he is NO any change or news, Thus there is High chances Biden will lose to tRump, just like Hillary Clinton lost to tRump in 2016. That would be grave since I do not see any prospects that a candidate like Senator Bernie Sanders will emerge in the near future again, and there might be a No-turning back point. DNC must think it over- the gains and losses of nominating Bernie Sanders who is the best choice for USA and the world.
10
It's worth mentioning that the for-profit media are run by and for white men. Cory Booker is as intelligent and articulate as Pete Buttigieg, and "gee, he can't seem to grab attention." Right. The supposedly liberal publications did in-depth articles on Pete and Bloomberg, and acted like Elizabeth Warren was invisible. I don't know, maybe I'm naive, but isn't there supposed to be some effort to report without bias?
3
“The medium is the message.” -Marshall McLuhan
The difference between that which has corporeal form, and that which has been incorporated, is simply a matter of linguistic framing. There is no such thing as media, absent corporeality.
We are what we eat.
The concept that our “news” can be fair or unbiased when the entire goal and principle of a capitalist corporation is to make a Profit for its stockholders. One of the goals of large media corporations is to NOT talk about breaking up the media or the U.S. having an equivalent to subsidized BBC, ect.
I used to ask a Fox watcher I knew “ why are you listening ( and trusting) someone making 30 $ Million per year to tell you what’s “best” for you?” As long as News is influenced by so much money ( much more since Trump ) and the need for Commercials from large corporations ( who can afford television commercials ),
We just need to add our bias to their news reports.
I think we saw some of this after “Super Tuesday”, when ,after winning one “Red State”, the media fell in line and temporarily stopped talking about issues and which states democrats were likely to actually Win in November.
6
When Bernie loses, and he will, he will not blame the fact that his policies are considered widely unworkable by most people old enough to shave.
Nor will he blame the fact that he has given the same stump speech half a billion times, and apparently hasn't had a new thought since Mary Tyler Moore reigned on television.
No, he will blame corporate-owned media, billionaires, and the democratic establishment. Sometimes, it's not the political environment, it's the candidate. And this is one of those times.
12
@Sparky Please explain to me how Biden is suddenly so winnable? What new ideas does he bring to the conversation? Do you really think his billionaire donors are going to let him govern for the working poor? Billionaires do not give money to politicians for charity. It is an investment and they will want to cash in on their investment once he is elected into office.
16
And I'd like to know what policies Trump has that are supported by, well, almost anyone?!
2
@smflan,
Biden barely ran any ads in MA. He beat Bernie and Warren there. Biden had literally no money left compared to Bernie's war chest. Money isn't everything I guess. Now we have Bernie running Obama ads and roping in Jesse Jackson while skipping Missouri (Hey look, there's my Black guy -a la Trump). Truth is we were crowning Bernie after wins in 3 small white states (and even there his vote bank had shrunk form 2016!)
It has more than "some" merit.
When you have a cable TV talking head remarking that Bernie Ssnders makes her "skin crawl", it's reasonable ask what contribution this person is making to American political discourse, other than doing the owners' bidding.
What Mr. Smith doesn't appreciate is the breadth of conventional wisdom, which makes any Sanders critique of American life today de facto ridiculous in the eyes of 6, 7 and 8 figure media personalities.
It's much the same in any coverage of Western Europe social arrangements, like universal publicly funded health care, which strike American journalists as absurd.
11
unfortunately, you leave out part of the comment made by Mimi Rocah, that she was looking forward to seeing Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders on the same stage. That makes the comment quite different from the way you cite it. But, of course, if you relied on the Fox News commentary you'd missed that essential bit of information.
1
@ernie
So her "skin crawl" comment is redeemed because she wants to see a debate, and I'm indistinguishable from Fox News, because I didn't report that fact, along with everything else this thoroughly dispensable talking head had to say?
And you claim there's no anti-Sanders bias?
1
Well, an interesting collection of Bernie conspiracy theorists and delusional whiners about how 'corporate' is mean to their guy. Sounds like a Trump rally.
Is there any chance at all that quite a few serious, educated and well informed people just disagree with you? Is it remotely plausible that asking Sanders tough questions about his promises is not about mainstream corporate dread of social and economic change, but more a matter of democratic give-and-take?
I fear some of what I am hearing here: sounds like self-righteous bitter people getting ready to stay home on election night and let Trump win, again. Telling that Jill Stein gets a heroic speaking role in this mania.
9
I think opinion needs to be separate from news. It is appropriate to have more opinion in support of Biden than in support of Sanders but it isn't appropriate for news articles to mix negative opinion with news coverage. And even unpopular candidates (unpopular to journalists) deserve serious coverage presenting their viewpoints without closely following negative critique.
4
@Jensetta Ok, so if Sanders can't win over certain demographics of "moderate" democrats, it's because he's an unelectable joke. But if Biden can't win over the progressive demographic it's because that demographic is self-righteous and bitter?? How is it the responsibility of the candidate in one case and the responsibility of the demographic in the other? This is absurd, and frankly it exposes your own self-righteousness. And it is very common to see this argument.
Of course it's legitimate that plenty of serious informed people disagree with Sanders' proposals. Most of Sanders' supporters probably also are not in 100% alignment with his 100% of his proposals. The reaction is not to the disagreement. The reaction is to the overwhelming dismissiveness. You don't disagree in a thoughtful, policy-minded way. You dismiss.
"Delusional whiners". Nice. You must be a Biden bro.
1
@mce
Much of the time they are reporting what he says. You need to talk to him about the wisdom of some of that--like accusing life-long Democratic activists like me 'corporate' lemmings. You claim to want a fair and open battle over ideas. Really?
1
The NYT and other mainstream media have been craving an opportunity to lay into Sanders and prop up Biden. The North Carolina results gave you guys a chance. The lack of objectivity has been painful to watch. Sanders is labeled as radical, angry and unelectable while Joe Biden is our lovable uncle/Savior. Oh, he isn't confused, he just "talks like a normal person."
But many of us view it differently. Sanders has a sharp mind, and a message that resonates with a large share of the electorate, especially those whose struggles are rarely picked up by the media. Biden has a checkered voting history, no message and has difficulties completing a sentence. I don't share your confidence he can beat Donald Trump and I am quite certain he won't do enough to tackle inequality or fight for universal healthcare. If Biden is the best we can do we are doomed for another four years. Yes, not as doomed as if Trump was reelected. Is that what's supposed to motivate us to vote?? Sad.
27
@Liba I could not have said this any better. It is as if you read my mind. If corporate media wanted a moderate to win the nomination (make no mistake, their fingers are all over this coup), why not pick a better candidate? I would have been proud to call Sens Booker, Warren, or Harris my president. ANY of the other candidates would have been good choices, but we are stuck with stodgy boring Biden? And yes I am angry at James Clyburn. In no way did he deserve to have as much clout as he wielded just prior to the SC primary. I wonder how Biden will pay him back if this gamble pays off? Isn't that how Washington DC works these days? Everyone just padding each others bank account?
9
@Liba
The fact that you say a Biden presidency would only be marginally better than 4 more years of Trump says a lot. Are you discounting the damage done by the current administration to social programs, the environment, income inequality, a court system getting ready to repeal Roe.
You honestly believe that? Or is this just the way Bernie zealots have taught themselves to see things? Come on, comrade, time to pay attention to the actual material conditions that surround you, not the ones in your fantasy life.
Since when has the American media been objective and disinterested? Yes, the history of journalism actual truth-seekers can be found, but editorial control has always been a factor in how and what gets published. In 2016 and for most of the coverage in 2020, the coverage of Bernie Sanders has mostly carried his messaging, with almost no vetting by journalists at all. Sanders had nothing to say about the help he got from the Russians in 2016 (and probably 2020, as well), but sees any media that criticizes him as being part of a corrupt capitalist elite.
Bernie Sanders (and everyone who wants to make monopolies illegal) is probably right that big media conglomerates must be broken up, but that is only one small part of the systemic problems with today's news coverage, where even relatively small actors can use fake news and targeted social media to have large impacts on public opinion. And where even large media companies have been shrinking budgets for investigative journalism. Also, some of the large media outlets (and government owned, but relatively independent ones like the BBC, CBC and ABC (Australian), too often give equal time and equal weight to both sides of a story, when the public would be better served by a frank rating of the arguments on both sides.
5
The link in this article of the video made in 1988 of a town hall in Vermont with Bernie, Abbie Hoffman, and David Dellinger is fascinating.
2
I must have been hallucinating all the positive coverage of Bernie in the "corporate press" for the weeks between Iowa and South Carolina when he was the "front runner."
10
@AnonymousPlease Really? Then you have been missing out on Chris Matthews crying and panicking during the first 4 primaries and caucuses.
3
More than anything, I would like to see reporting on the meetings that occur before news hits the page, airwaves, internet, etc. Privately owned news outlets have an agenda which, unfortunately, doesn't always include unbiased truth as their priority.
4
Bravo. I was surprised to see Democracy Now omitted. Amy Goodman and Juan Gonzalez have been at all for well over 20 years.
11
One of the most glaring examples of corporate media bias against Sanders (and Warren) was during the debates when they failed to ask other candidates how they plan to pay for expanding the status quo Affordable Care Act (Obama Care), which in fact will be more expensive than Medicare for All. Rather,they pushed for a sound bite that Sanders' and Warren's plans would raise taxes on the middle class (ignoring the overall savings).
24
I decided to buy the digital subscription while on sale. Because I find comments section of NYT more valuable than anything. Best arguments/counter-arguments can be found here.
16
@gureumi Provided they are not blocked by the moderators.
4
Maybe Trump criticism of a self interested and self referential media has a degree of validity after all.
3
Comparing Bernie to Trump on media matters is clearly wrong: Trump has all of FOX networks and Bernie has...?
7
Bernie has the internet / social media only, hence the “Bernie Bro” narrative designed to silence his supporters as mean.
4
@F TYT! A progressive news station I discovered last year when I cut cable and purchased youtube.tv subscription to replace it. The Young Turks (TYT) is part of their lineup. They make no apologies over their progressive bias, something which I appreciate. They will criticize GOP and DEMS equally. Most importantly, they focus on the issues of the candidates instead of their personalities or how much money they got from donors. Corporate Media treats these contests as a sporting match, while TYT discusses them much more seriously and fairly.
3
The current occupant of the White House received millions of dollars of free advertising for his meritricious campaign from the media. I saw his name "above the fold " in the New York Times almost daily, so it was no surprise to me that his cynical behavior, backed by the media, enabled him to win. I saw the same thing happen with Pete Buttigieg, over whom the media fawned because of his personal story. They brushed aside his obvious inexperience, and virtually shut out Cory Booker and Julián Castro, whereas they barely mentioned Elizabeth Warren. Each time the NYT mentioned her, it was in the context of questionable electability. Irresponsible corporate media must accept much of the blame for the disaster we're now living with.
7
I wish we were less concerned with the cult of personality around our politicians and treated the election process more like it’s a job interview, which it is. Bernie was treated unfairly by the media? Every candidate was treated unfairly, and none more so than those most qualified for the job.
7
I think this article comes too late. I believe the vast majority of Americans are ill-served by journalists whose voices have been amplified by tens, along with their wealth, and ink-stained wretches have been replaced by the heir to the Vanderbilt fortune.
Sanders is being driven down like Dixie, but that's not the true extent of the damage. Here in Colorado, a Progressive Senate candidate, Romanoff, just won the caucus with 55% of the vote over Hickenlooper's 30%, but the latter, a DNC Superdelegate and pick of Chuck Shumer, is poised to win the runoff with big corporate cash. The result will be an oil industry Democrat voting on climate change.
What you don't "get" is that we actually have to reach in our pockets and pay to beat the DNC before we have to reach in our pockets again to beat the Republicans.
The media laughs that they cannot fathom the resentment shown by Progressives toward their obviously slanted journalism. They have been "covering the story" by putting a tarp over it for decades.
14
This "new media" nonsense sounds like a wonderful way to fractionalize our country even more. The problem is not that there is a lack of alternate viewpoints out there, it is that there are too many. What America needs is trustworthy news sources who everybody goes to to find out what is happening in the world, so that we are all talking from the same page. I'm sorry. but it was better when we had two or three major news shows that everybody went to for the news. The anchors were honorable people who told the truth, as far as I remember. We need a whole lot less of opinionated bloviators and more people we can trust to tell the truth. How we get there from here is the real issue.
8
You are so right! Let’s stop the news as entertainment fallacy. We less people yelling opinions and more accurate information on a wide range of topics. PBS News Hour for instance.
2
@Chuck Zebrowski Thank you. I love PBS. I sort of trust the good old NYT's as well. But somehow, we have to find a way to divest real news from opinion. So much of what we hear or see passing as news is biased opinion, backed by the originators interpretation of "truth", supported by questionable "facts". I would rather just be made aware of the facts as they are received and verified, and left to form my own opinions. I never watch any of the bloviators on cable news, or participate in twitter, facebook, or the like. It is hard to avoid the "talking heads", because apparently all networks and news outlets think we are too dumb to figure out what is going on - it must be explained to us by people who think they are smarter than we are. Maybe. But I'll take my chances. I just want to know the news I am getting is as accurate as possible. There are not two sides of the truth.
I am a Sanders supporter, a 70 yo ex-hippie wannabe who has never threatened anyone and never would, and as a result of the 2020 election cycle, I have come to the conclusion that all you need to know about a reporting source's bias is "who signs your paycheck." Yes, that means the corporate sector and its friends on Wall Street will never support a truly progressive candidate as long as there's money to be made. You think the uninspiring Biden is going to bring out the youth vote? Most of them have grandparents who are younger than him! Even I find his cognitive and physical gaffes concerning. Good luck, DNC, you're turning Democrats into Independents at a record rate.
27
@Jennene Colky right, and maybe that's a good thing!
4
@Jennene Colky I agree with you Jennene, I am a 60 yr old boomer and Sanders supporter. As usual, the DNC leads from behind. They panicked and came to some weird conclusion that only Biden can beat Trump. They are committing suicide before our eyes, because they are abandoning the constituency of the party that wants a candidate that is hopeful and forward thinking and has big ideas. Biden is a candidate from the 1980s and that ship sailed long long ago. I have also said that the Baby Boom generation is the only generation that eats its young and we are seeing that right now.
2
@Jennene Colky
I am exhausted by this unrelenting chatter and Bernie and the 'youth vote' that will save us from a Trump second term.
What youth vote? The one that has failed to materialize thus far in most primary elections, and even the Iowa caucuses? The one that depends on young 'progressives' being pleased by everything that is said and done or they vote for Stein, and thereby get Trump elected? The one that has a history of packing rallies but staying home on election nights?
You mean that 'youth vote'?
I am reading all of these comments, so thankful to know that Americans share the same grievances against corporate media. I hope they listen, but something tells me they won't.
9
When in the Lumiere brothers showed their first movies in 1895 they were surprised to find that moving black and white images drew more public interest than color still photography which was a technology they also researched. We are, for some reason, fascinated by watching motion. We share this fascination with animals. Some birds will injure themselves attacking their reflections in a mirror.
That's just what we're doing now. We need to step back and acknowledge this addiction as alcoholics and the drug-dependent do regarding their own captivities. *Read the news, don't watch it.* The motion you see in media news rarely adds any information to the story. It is there to draw our attention. If motion and competition are what we need there are still racetracks in this country.
4
Wonderful. So now we'll have screaming on the right AND screaming on the left and never shall the twain meet.
2
I am furious at media in this country because they brought us Trump and are solely responsible for him! Hundreds of hours of free advertising of in 2016 alone informed me he would win. And now they prefer him to Bernie.
It is equally clear the media wants nothing to do with Mr. Sanders and that together with Democratic Party leaders plus previous candidates for President some version of three dimensional 3 card monte took place the last two weeks to prevent Mr. Sanders from any possibility of getting the nomination.
I no longer admire journalists or respect their profession and do in fact consider most of them class traitors.
10
@Rae
So 3-card monte = voting? When Sanders had accumulated 2.5% of the delegates needed to clinch the nomination (after Nevada), print, cable, and online news sites were all touting him as the "clear frontrunner." Phrases like "unstoppable momentum" were not uncommon. I didn't hear any complaints about coverage from the Sanders camp then. Now, that the results of voting have put him in second place, we're in the grip of a conspiracy promulgated by MSM. It's a curious phenomenon, no?
4
@Rae
'Media,' whatever is meant by that, did not bring us Trump, Rae. Here's what did: unhappy 'progressives' either stayed home, wrote in Bernie, or voted for Jill Stein. Tragic but simple, right? And reading this collective exercise in paranoid whining, I fully expect those voters to do the same again.
1
Finally! this is so obvious to anyone not in the media bubble. What a relief to read this (a very lone voice in the wind however)
5
My take on this piece is that both Sanders and Trump hold the media with equal disdain.
As a Democrat I find this disturbing as Sanders a leading candidate in our Presidential primary appears to place no value on a free press. Like all else with the Senators M/O , the press are supposed to court 'him' in the same way as we Liberal Democrats AKA as the Elites by the Bernie Bros should do.
As the primary wares on I am finding it increasingly difficult to say that I would support Sanders should he be 'my' parties nominee.
Demagoguery whether it comes from Trump or the Left does not sit well with me or most Democrats .
In the same vein neither does a statement like this from one of Sanders supporters in the media , describing her show as .
'A kind of anti-establishment Crossfire aimed at hating each others less, and the elites more'.
I have news for Sanders and those who support him 'Real' Democrats don't hate anyone including what you refer to as the elites 'who by the way without their support you loose the election , and neither do we demonize people for their wealth or lack thereof,
The more I read articles like this the better a Biden Presidency is looking. Frankly four years of Sanders may be less cruel and certainly less crazy than 4 more years of Trump. However I and many people I speak with find it equally unpalatable .
7
I agree with many of the issues addressed by Mr. Smith's column, but I ultimately find it a disappointment. Mainly because of all the unnecessary ad hominem attacks (what exactly does calling Joe Biden 'the Chris Matthews of politics' gain as an argument or mean for that matter), the utter lack of reflection (the admiration of Steve Bannon should be a point of concern, not evidence of a success) and the absence of consideration for the voices promoted (Ms. Ball's desire to redirect hate is not helpful and Mr. Greenwald's history of vicious and divisive commentary does little to grow a movement). Unfortunately, for this reader the take away is that despite Mr. Smith's claims, he is representative of a privileged elite more concerned with never compromising their professed beliefs than actually effecting change.
7
Hmmmm. So Trump emphasizes the media bias and the media panics, but Bernie has merit? come on.
2
@Pilot
That's right. The two are different. Trump denies facts, Bernie doesn't. Bernie respects the role of the news media in a democracy, Trump doesn't. Trump takes personal offense when news stories don't suit him and counters with lies. Bernie's criticisms are rooted in principles of fairness and accuracy, and in making them he points to facts, such as the way pharmaceutical and political ads are deployed.
9
Hmmmm. So Trump emphasizes the media bias and the media panics, but Bernie has merit? come on.
1
I believe not only the media is biased but the democratic party establishment, who have taken to trashing Bernie the same way republicans do against all their opponents and will do again when either Bernie or Biden are nominated - by attacking the man, exaggeration, scare tactics, etc. Bernie is an honorable man. I am 61 but can see his appeal for younger voters, whose future we are voting for or against.
9
Refreshing. I've been demoralized by many things in the past few years but nothing more than the corporatization of the media and publishing. I'm so grateful for the independent small investigative online journals. People I know who write are struggling financially. Public funded media is a must not just the national press but on the local level.
372
Says it all...on corporate media shows I never sit next to an uninsured person.
35
@Michael McColly demoralizing is the right word. I've never felt so demoralized by the corporatization of the media--and I work in media. I watch it happen every day.
24
@Michael McColly
Just flipping and at least 2 of the network morning shows were doing the exact same story as I flipped by......I didn't flip past the third.
8
This was a reasonably fair story—have been so looking forward to Ben Smith in the Times.
But he undersells substantially the media hostility to Sanders—I’ve never seen any candidate, and his supporters, subjected to such consistently harsh coverage. It’s shameful, really.
Also understated: the extent to which the breathless media coverage of Joe Biden between South Carolina and Super Tuesday contributed to his success in some states (though the delegate count is still very close). Biden has been foisted on the public by the mainstream political press, in the same way the Iraq war was pushed in 2004 and Hillary was sold in 2016. And the results, I am afraid, if Biden does win this primary, will be just as disastrous.
What was that definition of insanity, again, the one about doing the same thing and expecting different results?
510
@wm though it was something to see joe take 50% of a state after getting crushed in the previous 3. that was a telltale of what was to come in the mid and south states
12
@wm
They have forgotten the assumption of innocence.
And still all they can do is cast aspersions. No one has come up with evidence of anything bad that justifies this irrational antipathy to Bernie.
Of course him winning and setting our regulatory house back in order will lead to an awful lot of corporate hacks losing 6 digit salaries for being downsized.
40
@wm I agree wholeheartedly. So sick to death of the media treating politics like sporting events and watching my fellow Americans fall for it every single time. Joe Biden able to beat Trump? I doubt it very much. I think the only candidate who could would be someone who is absolutely NOT an establishment centrist. But, I was a child in the sixties and as such had high hopes for conscious evolution in America. Sadly, I’m still waiting.
61
It’s fascinating to me that this piece only glancingly, obliquely references “public media” as an alternative to corporate media (Sanders’ “radical” idea to give the public $200 vouchers to contribute to public media outlets of their choosing... not dissimilar to the UK).
Tens of millions tune in to NPR every day. It’s time we start taking public service journalism more seriously as a solution for these woes.
6
The Times’ editorial board should engage in similar self-reflection about Elizabeth Warren and Hillary Clinton. The editorial board also needs to reflect on how it covers candidates and campaigns in general.
9
As [the parent of] a Millennial Times subscriber [well, I"m the actual subscriber, as he has his degree, runs IT for a medium-sized business, but carries student debt and makes only $18/hour], I agree with @MK.
The gap between the Times' opinion page and the concerns of my son has been yawning to the point where sending my son articles has become pointless. (He is, as you might guess, a hard-core Bernie supporter.)
I'm more on the fence as 60-somethings are wont to be these days, but I agree with the younger readers that the breathless horse-race "comeback" coverage has been jaw-droppingly disappointing. And I confess a certain disappointment that we may—MAY—not get to see Bernie go up against Individual-1. The kindly current—CURRENT—front runner might not fare so well.
Why even have primaries staged across the calendar? Why are Iowa, New Hamspshire and South Caralina considered "representative" of the rest of us? My family in Louisiana can't vote until April.
It's getting harder for me to argue with my son's cohort that their votes do matter.
Congratulations to the Times for adding Ben Smith to the stable. I look forward to reading more from him.
16
One might notice the glee expressed by many in the liberal media as they report that Biden is ahead of Sanders. They didn’t report on the polls that show that Bernie but not Hillary could defeat Trump in 2016, and they don’t report on the polls today that show that Bernie but not Biden could defeat Trump today. Today on MSNBC they talked about Bernie’s heart attack and Trump’s obesity, but they didn’t mention Biden’s past problems. I suspect that many liberal Democrats—both in the media and in the population—really don’t want to lose the social and financial advantages they enjoy because of inequities. It is these inequities that Bernie aims to deal with. Trump was able to tap into the skepticism as to the motives of too many Hillary supporters. Even though he lied and slandered, he talked to voters in Michigan and other states. How many times did Hillary visit Michigan, or was she too busy hobnobbing with rich people at fundraisers on the East Coast?
11
Wondering, would the author would say that the NYT story "As Bernie Sanders Pushed for Closer Ties, Soviet Union Spotted Opportunity", for example, is "good" and "fair"?
(Spoiler: it wasn't and is just one example of many. But it was a particularly good example of the bias that's regularly presented in NYT reporting on Bernie.)
10
Thanks Ben. Two excellent columns in a row.
2
"...while some left-wing media outlets are now emerging..."
The author seems to have never heard of Democracy Now, but I don't suppose he's unique in that way.
5
@RRA Nor any mention of Vox or NPR. I'm sure there are others.
1
After the NYTimes decision to have Ross Douthat pen the Biden support piece right before Super Tuesday, I no longer trust any of the media except maybe Chris Cuomo for now.
We have to continue to call them out, because they also are tremendously brave at times, and like most fallible human institutions, necessary even in their tarnish.
4
The “liberal” press if it can ever be considered so in this age of monopolistic news outlets, has done nothing short of running a disinformation campaign against Sanders.
MSNBC, otherwise known as MSDNC, has served as an arm of the established supposedly centrist (neoliberal) Democratic Party, whereas Sanders and his fellow progressives would like to bring the party back to its Keynesian FDR roots.
The new neoliberal order, in which the money, power and voice are in the hands of the few, don’t want to lose their grip on it.
The Washington Post, owned now, by Amazon - Jeff Bezos, has run negative articles about Sanders at a 5 to 1 ratio compared to his “centrist” neoliberal opponents, who are less threatening to this skewing of power into the hands of the very few.
Yes, he threatens the status quo of Profits over People. Of course the corporate press has sabotaged him.
8
This article is exactly the sort of dishonest manipulative knifing Bernie speaks of when he speaks of establishment media.
It is pretty much all propaganda in the most expert way using facts and willful misinterpretation to create a different and unreal view of reality that self reinforces.
4
Let us start by doing one right thing:
Let us print for all to see that Sydney Ember who covers the Sanders campaign for the Times is the daughter-in-law of a senior executive of Bain Capital. She is also married to a former employee of the same firm which is one of the leading private equity firms in the planet and a beneficiary of the carried interest loophole Sanders would like to get rid of on day one.
Conflict of interest?
You tell us Mr. Smith.
The chances that my comment will be printed is close to nil. But we have to try.
10
“the most powerful progressive on TV, the MSNBC host Rachel Maddow.”
And how is Rachel Maddow a progressive? Has she stated it? If so what policies is she fighting for?
I support progressive policy and it has five major aspects. M4A, wage increases, education for all, green economy and ending corruption of our politics through legalized bribery. That’s the core of progressive policy. It’s not an identity.
It’s not about calling yourself a progressive. It’s about the policy. And hijacking the movement to try and insinuate that progressives have a voice where they don’t is dubious. This is an example at the times of trying to derail the movement towards these policies by claiming Maddow somehow represents progressives. She doesn’t.
If you want to hear a real progressive voice try John Idararola on the Damage Report. It’s on YouTube.
9
It is a fact that a lot of corporate networks, such as CNN owned by Time Warner and MSNBC owned by Comcast have a strategic interest in thwarting any candidate that threatens to break up corporate monopolies, to regulate them for the benefit of consumers or to tax the wealthy.
When Bernie talks about "the establishment", it is actually hard for some voters to see that the worlds of corporate power and media power are often very closely intertwined, very closely linked, and this is where "the establishment" and its interests come together to try and influence the political process for their benefit. However, this is the reality.
522
@Ryan Butler I simply don't buy your grand conspiracy theory. I watch CNN and MSNBC and see very thoughtful analysis from people like David Axelrod, James Carville, Steve Schmidt, Rachel Maddow and many others.
Sanders is a far left candidate for American politics, he is also unyielding in his views and my way or the highway turns a lot of people off. He does well with younger voters who are more idealistic (and also like the idea of having all their student debt magically dissolved).
But most of Sanders' thinking doesn't bear scrutiny. He has no idea how to pay for his programs. He isn't nimble enough to expand his base. His electability is based on youth voter turnout and has been a complete failure. These are the real reasons he is unlikely to be the nominee.
15
@Ryan Butler
Bernie is a flawed candidate.
If he wants to blame his loss on the media so be it.
No one wants to have a kvetchy, angry old man who demands a Socialist Revolution as our leader.
Trump was bad enough.
We want stability not a Revolution.
6
@Sparky
Sanders is a middle of the road candidate for American politics. You have allowed the last forty years of artificial push and drag to the right of our politics to skew your POV.
Joe Biden would be to the right of reagan. Maybe you are not old enough to remember but reagan was actually as for to the right in the 70;s as Bernie is being falsely portrayed as being to the left today. Bernie is where the middle was before hatred of our government became the mantra of the recolonizers.
7
The biggest media problem is that local newspapers have been nearly destroyed by losing advertising money to the internet. This is undermining democracy because citizens in many localities have no way of finding out what their local government is doing. Another area of concern is 24-hour cable news. Among the problems here is that there is a propaganda news network that pretends to be a real news network, that is of course Fox News. In effect, Fox News is the propaganda arm of the Republican Party and has been cleverly set up to look something like CNN when in fact these two news networks have little in common, CNN is about journalism and Fox News is about propaganda. But even legitimate 24-hour cable news has problems because it attracts viewers by pitting left vs right on everything and really is in the business of raising emotions to drive ratings providing mainly what can be call infotainment.
1
Great article. Part of the reason I don't watch cable news much anymore (aside from Chris Hayes every now and then) is the seething contempt they have for left AND right populist politics, on top of corporate interests driving much of the coverage. Watch the debates and there is a certain level of seriousness ascribed to neoliberal centrist economics and Washington consensus foreign policy through the moderator questions. Anything associated with leftism is considered illegitimate and wholly unserious. You could call for $10 trillion in new military spending and no one will ask how you pay for it. If you call for social spending, in any amount, they want an itemized invoice and ask why you're trying to bankrupt the country. Most are not the least bit curious about why Trump succeeded and Bernie, who is reviled by party leaders and virtually all DC and NYC punditry, has not gone away. They do not seem the least bit curious to figure it out why, either.
778
@Alex These pundits are not paid to be curious. They are paid to protect their corporate ownership's interests.
And they do. Very rigorously.
125
@Alex -Trump caught the media by surprise (go back to the election videos), AOC similarly. Bernie continues to have support despite the media’s best efforts to denounce it. They turn to old Joe and old reliable Hillary for quotes. Let’s not vote for change, the democratic establishment will cheer election night, then what! 1992 or 1972 (joe) politics.
12
The divide between Bernie and non-Bernie voters in the primaries breaks pretty cleanly along age lines. Younger people watch much less cable news than our parents and grandparents. MSNBC, CNN, and many Times and Post columnists have been palpably hostile to Bernie. Every debate has been a referendum on Medicare For All, with the questions all coming from right wing and industry talking points.
If the race concludes how I think it will, TV news will have played a major part in convincing the over-45 crowd that Bernie was unelectable against Trump. Exit polls show Medicare for All and a Green New Deal to be very popular with Democrats. Polls show Bernie beating Trump in MI, with Biden tying Trump.
This election has been defined by fear and self-doubt. We all have a little pundit in our heads telling us who other people will vote for, giving us second thoughts about what feels right to us.
I will say, no Democrat who ran as a centrist has won a 1st term in at least 20 years. Not Gore, Kerry, or Clinton.
967
@Ted B They should make you an election pundit. A whole lotta sense here.
I'm dumbfounded by the Michigan polls showing Bernie so far behind. Hopefully those are as wrong as the 2016 Michigan polls. We need time to develop a strategy to cut through the Cable News Curtain blocking out the critiques of Biden's record on social security cuts and his preference for "muscular" foreign policy, including his key role in building Democratic support for the Iraq War and advocating for an invasion of Sudan.
His candidacy is nothing but a death wish by corporate interests secretly rooting for 4 more years of Trump tax cuts and scandal boosted media profits.
179
@Ted B Some older people back Sanders - I'm 71 and gave him the maximum donation this time and last time too. But media is still a huge problem. Murdoch lost $500 million starting his Faux News, and the left needs a billionaire to step up and buy some media instead of running for president.
104
@Ted B
People over 45 don’t need media to tell us Bernie is unelectable. I would vote for him—or virtually anyone—against Trump, but we all know people who would it’s for the devil they know, Trump, over Bernie. That’s a real phenomenon and those over 45 show up reliably, unlike the youth.
43
I would like to think that the young people in the US are now pretty savvy about how things work in US politics; that they will trust more what they see and hear directly from the candidates and trust less what they see and hear in the media.
3
I subscribe to the NYT because my hometown newspaper is pretty useless. I don't watch cable news. I do watch the public broadcasting News Hour regularly. If you want unbiased news, that's a fine place to start.
If you want a more "left leaning" view, google articles by Ralph Nader.
But The Times is complicit in the major news bias against Bernie. How could it be otherwise? Even if the editorial board wanted to lean toward progressives, their advertisers are the 1%.
Bernie's idea of significantly supporting public broadcasting is a fine goal.
9
MSNBC took down Warren in October when she was at her peak of popularity. I cannot believe this was any accident when Bloomberg operatives were constantly providing shock waves of fear about Warren's policies and plans. The Economist front page article was hardly objective. There must be producers at MSNBC who are directing how segments should skew the topics and opinions, because it seems so obvious to an objective viewer. At least the world knows that FOX is totally bent, corrupt and incapable of even reporting the weather without bias.
8
TV news is Entertainment! Read the late Prof. Neil Postman.
When you're losing, you start blaming the refs or the game itself.
I read this and just hear a lot of 'sour grapes' whining - the message and messenger are now getting rejected by the primary vote-to-date, so now we get analysis like this article.
This is why you news folks come off as so detached from everyday common people.
4
Love him or hate him it is difficult to question Bernie's commitment to the well being of his fellow Americans and the rest of humanity.
7
So many people who support Bernie listened to him talk for over 2 hours calm and relaxed on Joe Rogan and he came across like FDR. Nobody watches the debates that format is really not useful.
10
I disagree. The press must be honest and fair. But from my perspective they're too generous to Sanders, who is running on a Democratic ticket but attacks Democrats!
6
He’s right- and this is largely why Trump was able to convince his supporters that the MSM is full of elites who tell you what to believe.
Tom Steyer has an op-Ed in this paper that largely makes the same point. Supporters of any of the 2nd tier candidates from Booker and Castro, to Yang and Gabbard all complain of the same thing that Bernie and Steyer have pointed out. A refusal to grant earned media time while other candidates become media darlings. This impacts their ability to get out their message while sending large numbers of people elsewhere to find information about their candidates.
And when people learn that the MSM is not providing fair coverage, they begin to question the truth of everything covered in the media - a situation that results in people being certain that the MSM is fear-mongering for eyeballs with the Coronavirus or actively seeking reasons to bad-mouth Trump - so even if the Ukraine call sounded bad, the MSM isn’t trusted to fairly cover it.
The MSM needs to take a hard look in the mirror and determine what matters. Right now it is profit. I liked Yang’s local journalism plan and it would be a great place to start rebuilding trust.
8
Senator Sanders is just trying to intimidate the press in the same way as every politician does in order to get them to ignore the his rougher, far-left edges. His "plan" for the "media revolution" is nothing less than the standard socialist imperative to control the press, because in their view, if it is not obediently providing the government approved message, it is not working for the masses. This is very, very similar to the what the President thinks! Truly the Senator and the President, although poles apart politically, are moving on parallel tracks.
7
The media has a great time bemoaning the demise of the middle class while simultaneously doing its best to completely annihilate it. Bernie is the sole voice of what must be done in this country with his "Our Revolution" campaign. Revolution of any kind makes the corporate ruling class very nervous. "Those who have the gold make the rules" is alive and well as our national slogan. Until there is rioting in the streets, as protestors have done in Hong Kong to save their fragile democracy, things will only get worse. We can have an idealogical revolution or a violent one--take your pick, media.
6
The rise of cable television and the collapse of independent newspapers and local television stations is a phenomenon of my lifetime. Media has consolidated to survive. Right wing Fox emerged long before MSNBC and is a far stronger magnet. Trump's doctored video of Biden "endorsing him" is running regularly there, even thought they know it is a fake.
"Verify the facts" was the mantra of journalism at one time. "Air it first" seems to be the mantra now.That's how so many troll stories get so much traction. Then a lot of time, money and effort has to be exerted to prove they are false, but damage has already begun. Mainstream media like the Times does work to publish the factual story. And publishing, in print and online, is an expensive business.
Sanders has had a lot of positive press and has certainly been able to share his ideas with the country. His ideas of "Class war", revolution and government provided everything do not seem to appeal to the majority of Americans. Yes, there are some good ideas in his plan. But there are some bad ideas in there also. He proposes "free" healthcare and education-but nothing is free. It has to be paid for somehow. Elizabeth Warren has a better blueprint of how to get to some of those objectives , but Bernie shouted her down and outspent her until she left the race. Not exactly an example of equal access.
4
It's nice to see The Hills' "The Rising" getting some attention here. I discovered them perhaps a month or so ago and I'm much the better for it. Intelligent, insightful approaches to the news. They invite both left and right wing people on and everyone is given their space to talk and share ideas.
What is striking, through the process of mutual respect, is just how much both sides of the aisle have in common. The disagreements are real, but respectful and often break down into differences of philosophy and resolution rather than rancor and disdain.
6
@Michael
Facts and reason fix most of that. Which leaves us with willfulness as the main problem. As it has always been. And that becomes clear when reason is applied with the concept of assumption of innocence which Bernie Sanders never gets from anyone. Can you blame him for seeming resentful of that?
1
It’s time to limit political advertising spending. Perhaps then we will see more information and less entertainment.
7
Bernie supporters don't understand that most of the opposition to Bernie is not opposition to his policies, but opposition to four more years of Trump. Many of us just don't believe that Bernie can be relied upon to beat Trump. We've heard all about the expanded electorate, etc, but we are not convinced. We'd rather capitalize on the moderate candidates that flipped the house in 2018.
19
@TomL
Moderates are claiming that Bernie losing insinuates rejection of progressive policy. They tell us incrementalism and then when they win reject progressive policy completely.
So the question is. Will Biden choose a republican and cause massive blowback or a respected progressive such as Nina Turner.
I hear a lot by moderates about compromise yet see none coming from them. They want our votes but not our voice nor our values.
22
@Mathias
There are a lot of suppositions in your comment along with needless ‘lines in the sand’.
Which is kind of the point with ‘most moderates’. See? That is how this works.
The truth is that humans do not operate well under uncertainly and quick change do not work well when we are looking at lasting change. Socialist collective policies have been with us for over a hundred years. They have back slid and they have surged. But so have the policies of unbridled capitalism.
To be sure, this see sawing is frustrating for both ends of the spectrum; but it is not only how humans are more comfortable with change, it is how change lasts.
As far as financing the media is concerned...we have always enjoyed a wide variety of types of media in this country. The biggest difference now is we can now access those different POV more easily. But...and here is the hard part...you need to get people to actually watch these different POV.
This piece really reads more heavily on the opinion side than a news piece. Bernie’s opinion may hold some truth, but it is the opinion of some of us out here that a big missing element of his solution is not saving more of the boots on the ground local news outlets. Money is not the only issue here and that is what has many of us scratching our heads over this.
1
@TomL
Peoples views on electability are influenced by the media. An examples is when you see several days of coverage about how Bernie loves Castro and nothing about Biden's mental lapses.
3
The DNC is playing a much bigger role in fear mongering in regards to Sanders. They are operating in a manner I would expect from Conservatives. This election cycle is proof positive that there is truly no difference between the conservatives and the Democratic elites. They both thank the media for being on board with their fear mongering.
40
@Bill I'm an outsider but I follow the US elections with interest. But you have well-spotted the issue. I was surprised these last days to see how media, the NYTimes too, play the fear-mongering card, ignoring (on purpose) the policies and the ideas but emphasizing on mood and character. And I was very dissapointed from the democratic party, which, in a burst of undemocratic moves, gave the nomination to Biden. They were supposed to be the democratic pole, but now they just look so similar.
Biden vs Trump is a second Clinton vs Trump. It will be a close call, but whoever wins, the result for the average American will be more or less the same.
Greetings from Denmark.
1
@Bill,
How is that? Bernie had all the momentum with Iowa being first in the nation (why?), followed by NH. Bernie decided to court Latinos at the expense of black outreach. Like any other politician he played that game. He lost that strategy. Now he has no answer for momentum on Biden's side.
@Greenfield
This is not about black, white, Latino or Asian.
This is about party elites protecting the status quo
Mr. Sanders wants ALL to do better
1
This is true for non-profit public TV as well. PBS news cannot seem to report the political news without mentioning “socialist” Bernie or Billionaire Bloomberg, despite the good things both have done for the country. Bloomberg was the best candidate but was discounted because he used his own money to compensate for the billions- worth of free advertising TV and newspapers had already provided to the other contestants, but they never mentioned that. Shame on PBS and the commercial news media. We now gave a banana republic electoral system.
16
@Darrel Lauren
A multi billionaire who cannot connect with people and, besides climate change and gun policy, whose views are more closely aligned with conservative Republicans was not the best democrat candidate. In fact of all the people on the stage in the last debate he was inarguably the worst.
2
The failures of his own campaign to succeed with any voters he did not get last time is largely the candidates (and his online minions) fault. His message of if you are not with us you are against us was bound to turn off anyone not in the choir. Always blaming the media and boogeyman establishment, the argument that if I don't win its not fair, attempting to de-legitimize anyone who speaks or votes against you is thought of as such a Trumpian maneuver. It is not false, however, that in 2016 it was Trump who learned this from Sanders, not the other way round.
Hopefully it undermines Trump in the general election as much as it sunk Sanders in these primaries.
10
I don't have cable so I can't watch cable news. I pickup bits and pieces from late night comedy. However, I don't consider cable news a credible source of information. Just like late night comedy, cable news is news based entertainment.
You'll notice even the comedy shows are settling into their ideological lanes, none of which are clearly free from corporate interests. This point is explicit. The writers even make jokes about how they avoid criticizing corporate sponsors. News isn't credible without this sort of honesty and transparency.
If I had to choose any news source which is reasonably unbiased, I'd say either NPR or BBC. Everything else feels like sorting through ideological lenses. A point which supports Sanders. Public news services are the best source of unbiased news. Not perfect but better.
I can hear the Trump thumpers now. "But public news is socialist state-run media!" Not really. There are a few important caveats. 1) Public media needs to remain operationally independent from the government. 2) Public media is required to remain impartial. 3) Public media cannot censure the free speech; they can only air and challenge speech.
As you'll note, the BBC's charter requires the network to be free from both political and commercial influence. This is sometimes easier said than done. However, I think the network presents a good model towards a responsibly informed public and a reasonably self-reflective media.
6
@Andy
Do a search for John Iadarola on the Damage Report. He interviews candidates all the time and discusses the news from a progressive perspective.
Here we have it.
Bernie Sanders hasn't been leveraging the Democratic party's primary and debate system for six years in a quest to become President, he's done it in a quest to start a Socialist News Network.
Another way he's like Trump. We know Trump never expected to actually win—didn't want to be president, had no idea what the job entailed. Still doesn't.
My theory of the Trump candidacy of 2015-'16 has always been that his real intent was to peel away the angriest crust of the Republican and Libertarian parties from Fox News (which he complained about even as as he exploited it) for his own disgust-fueled "news" and "opinion" outlet.
Part of Sanders' strategy to do it, unlike Trump's yet (if Sanders destroys our unity as he did in '16, we can expect it in a second Trump term), is to break up media companies.
Crystal Ball is Bernie Sanders' Kellyanne Conway. Bannon and Carlson compliment her as a strategy to divide and conquer.
Hatred of elites is still hatred. It harms the self more than its target. Hatred defines the right. It must not consume the left or an opportunistic demagogue will leverage it against us all, as Trump did.
Saying everything is broken breeds destructive anarchy, not pitch-in-and-fix-it. Most revolutions just shuffle the deck for elites.
A majority of people love our country and our fellow citizens and broadly agree on much of the change we need. We amend the Constitution by turning red states purple, not making blue zones glow in the dark.
18
@J T A lot of frankly bizarre theories based on almost nothing? Sanders won't be creating a news network I don't know what you are talking about. I think he just wants people to have healthcare.
6
The media is all about making money. When corporations took over that's when the media showed what they are all about - ratings and making money. I watch the television news media about 20 minutes a day now. I am sick to death of all of these talking heads bloviating and telling us what to think. I'm old enough to remember the days of three television networks who simply reported the news and let the viewers process what they just saw and heard.
25
@susan I remember those days also and miss them terribly
3
In France we have the online "Mediapart" providing investigative and opinion journalism independent of the established elite community and their corporate wealth. It is widely read and well-respected. It has resulted in legal proceedings against prominent political figures and the control of false news and propaganda in the other media outlets.
Does the US have such a counterforce?
11
MSM has given Bernie a pass. Voters have not. Now he is whining. People like Saagar Enjeti and Anand Girdhardas are in this for the dollars just like any other MSM pundit they keep complaining about. Punditry itself is a profession that survives on the same economic principles that gave us the Kardashians. "Hey look, I've got something to say because I spent some time at an Ivy league school so buy my book and watch my show because my Ivy education has given my excellent punditry skills and you common folk can't really figure this stuff out on your own".
13
The NYT is not exempt from the "corporate media" syndrome.
If you scan other media (eg. Reuters, BBC, Al Jazeera) you will often find prominent news items that are totally un-reported or under-reported in the NYT. Opinion pieces in the NYT are sometimes strangely short-lived, re-titled, or re-written. This happens because the powerful elite and their corporations have too much influence via their advertising dollars. If they don't like what they read they can call for a reduction of run time or a complete avoidance of the story.
Sad.
12
Finally, some honesty. I have been regularly reading the NY Times for 40 years. I have never been more disgusted with this newspaper. Not even when they helped Bush and Cheney sell the war on Iraq. Both in the 2016 campaign and in this one, the way this paper has relentlessly either ignored or smeared Sanders has been shocking and entirely without integrity. The publishers appear to have cynically decided they could use the comments pages to just monetize the outrage of their readers. Clicks are clicks, right?
The same goes for MSNBC. What they have done is literally unforgivable. The things that have been said on air about Sanders by hosts like Chris Matthews and guests like Mimi Rocah and James Carville, to name just a few, have been despicable.
During the 2016 campaign, ABC devoted hours of total minutes to the Trump campaign, an extraordinary amount of free advertising, and virtually blacked out the Sanders campaign. That practice has never changed. In 2016, the infamous and now-ousted head of CBS, Les Moonves, excused his network's obsequiousness with regard to Donald Trump by famously saying, "He may be bad for America, but he's good for CBS."
When every major corporate news media outlet puts profit over fairness or even the truth, Democracy fails.
49
This rely nails it. The NYT is just as responsible for the extremes all of the candidates embraced in certain issues by its own irresponsible coverage that was fueled by big anti Trump bias. Now all the Democrats have no reasonable, thought out or balanced plan for immigration, much less reform, due to endless harrowing and one sided stories which were a backlash to Trump. Just one example. if a candidate is gay, or better yet, gay and female, that is an automatic pass to be endorsed, never mind qualifications.
3
There is no merit in what the Trump of the left says on the media - maybe he lost onSuper Tuesday because many voters DO NOT LIKE HIM.
9
You are making our point. Super Tuesday was a bunch of small very conservative southern states that will vote red in November. Biden's win were far less significant than the coverage made it out to be.
10
@GMT thanks for the comment but New Hampshire and Iowa where Sanders won are not exactly diverse states
4
@E
Or he lost because they fear a guy who calls himself a socialist is a road to far.
I listened to Clyburn speech and it was powerful. I believe Clyburn saved Biden. The trust he put into Biden to deal with the racism in this country was a powerful message.
Hope Biden is worth it.
3
I love the fact that so far Ben Smith has started every column with someone praising him.
7
NY Times can be included in this.
20
"He wants to break up big media." Who would argue with that besides maybe big media? Perhaps a more important question: Who'a going to be objective in giving ink to big media breakup proponents? The NYT? Hmmm.
10
"his struggle to persuade older black Democrats to join his revolution, aren’t media inventions. They’re good, fair stories."
Did you ever think his inability to persuade older black Democrats might stem from the stories they hear and read in their sources of news? These days, you know only what you see and hear and read. Fox, MSNBC, NPR/PBS viewers and listeners and readers each live with their own set of facts and reality. And when the media distorts, lies, discredits, insinuates false narratives (as in NYT re: Sanders' USSR sister-city) meant to shape your opinion, why, of course that's what you'll believe to be true. How else could older black voters, whom Biden sided against in bankruptcy law, fought against in busing, whose children Biden helped put in jail through the crime bill he wrote and were disproportionately killed in a war he supported, who's wanted to freeze and cut social security and other spending and who was on the side of the banks' deregulation via the overturn of Glass-Steagall, which led to a housing collapse that greatly affected their communities, think he's the answer to their problems? "1984". We have arrived.
15
What we're seeing now is at least one consequence of the disemboweling of the FCC, the Fairness Doctrine and, in 1996, the Telecom Act sold by Bill Clinton. At that time, roughly 50 corporate entities owned all the US media (newspapers, TV/Radio, cable, movies). Clinton touted the wonders of the Internet making everybody a media maven. And what do we have today? A half dozen corporate entities and their front versions own 80% of that same US media mix. Disney, Comcast are just two. And if you include FB, Apple and Google's reach? The corporate media is simply the PR front for Wall Street and oligarchy. Zucker and Medved cheered Trump's run for the presidency as bad for America but great for their business. Still the case.
15
I disagree. We all have access to the whole of media and it results in a full range of ideology and opinions. Despite efforts to demonize Hillary Clinton by media on the left as well as the right, she still got the most popular votes in both the 2008 and 2016 primaries and the 2016 general election because the media also covered her accomplishments. I was not a supporter by knowing her personally...my knowledge is entirely from the media.
The real problem is the majority no longer calls the shots in this country and that is due to our system of government which has allowed that to be legal and to get farther out of whack than when originally conceived before computerized gerrymandering and the demographic migration to cities.
7
Angry outsiders will always be angry outsiders. No amount of media recognition will soothe their dissatisfactions. Sanders gave them a home, a place to come to. Look what happened. Sanders is about to lose the nomination largely due to failure of his young supporters to vote. In the end, they remain disaffected, even when welcomed by Sanders.
10
@blgreenie I’m not an angry outsider dude. I’m a subscriber to this paper since the mid-1980s. I won’t vote for Joe and if presented with that as my choice will happily not vote for the first time in my life. The media including this paper is part of the country’s elite power structure and does not want Bernie Sanders in power.
3
@Rae I understand your dislike of Biden, but why abstain and risk another Trump term? I believe that large structural re-making of political life / governing is needed, but isn't Trump the far and away bigger risk to that than Biden?
Why no mention of Democracy Now!? Amy Goodman and Juan Gonzalez are some of the finest journalists in the country. Democracy Now! is funded entirely through contributions from listeners and viewers and does not accept advertisers, corporate underwriting or government funding. It can be accessed through cable or Roku and is incredible unbiased journalism.
29
I used to listen to Amy Goldman's Democracy Now, but quit in May after years. Goodman is anything but accurate and errors of omission are just as bad as errors of commission. there us nothing wrong with advocacy journalism and Goodman was up front about it, but either the money in donations or the juicy stories or just the attention, Goodman killed her credibility being anti Trump to the point of dishonest reporting.
I’m so happy that Ben Smith has joined the Times. A true “hold the mirror” piece after a long series of thinly disguised progressive pieces coming from th one who have nothing to lose whether Trump comes to power or Biden. But they have a whole lot to lose or have to invest a lot of energy to rebuild their privileged network in the Bernie world, if that’s even feasible. Keep your honest opinions going, Ben!
5
NYT consistently fails to admit its bias against Sanders and progressives. It gives lip service with a "not too bad" article once in a blue moon, but has been dreadful in its treatment of progressive candidates. They were "all in" for Clinton well before the primaries began in 2015, as were the rest of corporate media.
That is because they are owned and run by 1%ers. Sanders just does not reassure the rich, because his concerns are for the masses.
However, any attempt to point this out has only about a 30% chance of bring printed as a comment.
26
@Chris Guess
The corporate media have seen fit to print your comment.
Obviously you haven't seen the studies showing there was more media bias against Hillary Clinton, including via the NYT, during the 2016 presidential race, than against Sanders or Trump.
3
The corporate media didn’t just cover Biden’s recovery they helped crest it through their dishonest coverage of Sanders.
34
What? The media/establishment might not be giving Bernie a fair shake? Gee, thanks Captain Obvious.
Blaming it on individuals is just more slight of hand. It's like blaming greed for corruption. Greed is natural, corruption is the natural result of a lack of policing and punishment. Please stop blaming individuals and symptoms of problems when the system itself is at fault.
14
I commented on the health care article by the Hoover Institute fella earlier and suggested the NYT printed it to prove how right it was in slagging Sanders in its editorials and op-ed opinions. The comment did not see the light of day.
The NYT is not the “liberal” news outlet it claims to be.
There is nothing more important in the USA election than universal health care.
Any Democrat who does not advocate this policy will only rule as Trump lite only without the vulgarness .
25
The problem with Bernie is buried in your column in this sentence: " Mr. Sanders wants to remake the media in a new model."
Bernie is the Don Quixote of American politics, who wants to remake everything: the media, the political system, the financial system, and the medical system.
And he decries anyone who pushes back on those fantasies.
Who in their right mind would vote for this delusion?
11
@JS
And you jump on the media saying what you want to hear. Can you point me to his policy or recent debates where he has advocated for this?
Reality is I have seen zero negative news on a Biden since he took the lead. He has major flaws. His medical policy plan costs more than Bernie’s plan as well.
How many months did they attack M4A. Yet more and more studies are showing it’s cheaper yet not a single article. Nothing asking Biden how he will pay for his plan? Have you hear it even one time? And why isn’t it repeated constantly like it was for Warren and Sanders?
Studies backing up lower costs of Sanders to Bidens plans: Lancet, Annals of Internal Medicine, PLOS Medicine and Journal of General Internal Medicine.
1
Much of what is said here in the columns and in the comments denies the voters' free will. The people are just putty to be molded into shape, bad (by theirs) or good (by ours). Be thankful we have elections, but hope they are more open and do not exclude independents.
2
@Bruce Williams : Have you followed any of the reporting (much of it by NPR) about how, for Super Tuesday Biden voters, good ol' Joe wasn't their first -- or even second -- choice. They voted for him because they believed him to be the most "electable".
Where did they get that idea from?
Biden is long past his expiration date, sadly displaying many signs of slipping mental faculties. He doesn't seem to stand for anything. Trump will eat his lunch in the general election.
1
Talk about missing the point. The problem with the media, and journalism generally, isn't that we need a new set of talking heads shouting at one another. That's just another version of politics as sporting event. The real challenge is finding the resources to do actual investigative journalism. What we need more of is reporters digging for stories in the real world. Those are where the important issues are found, not in some studio.
27
@Michael Willett
Exactly!
This newspaper's reporters seem to believe that their job is to report the self-serving leaks from the Trump administration, include a disclaimer from someone identified as a "partisan" democrat, and their job is done.
Reporting is more than simply writing the two different things two people say -- one based on facts and the other not - and presenting those two statements as if both have equal weight and there is no possible way for anyone - especially a journalist - to be able to discover what is right.
Journalism is doing the reporting to learn what is true and presenting it as such - along with making it crystal clear that the other side is lying and getting a statement from the lying side about why they chose to lie to the American people.
7
Is Senator Sanders unaware that the Democratic Primary is over and every second he stays in makes him look brazenly ignorant of reality. He needs to be begging Joe for a job.
7
@terry brady It is? Making reality again? Should they should cancel next Sunday’s debate and not let anyone else vote? Are you a Republican who would vote for Joe? The party power brokers have done their job.
@terry brady
It’s not over. But the media sure succeeded in framing it that way didn’t it.
Delegate wise it is nearly a tie. Many states to go. But the scales have been heavily weighed upon. I haven’t seen a single article about Bidens issues. Everything is about Obama Boys style attacks and leaning on progressives as illegitimate after their policy has received nearly half the democratic vote.
Yet moderates want zero voice fro us and wonder why people are so upset and aggressive. You have giant megaphones broadcasting 24/7 to bring down progressive policy and all they have is their individual voices to counter. Maybe that’s why they shout so loud?
Anyone who thinks corporate media doesn't have a problem is crazy. The encapsulation of what Trump did in 2016 was perfect and the American people lapped it up from the 24 hour news cycle trough..
Corporate media is its own worst enemy and it deserves the reckoning that is sure to come.
Journalism matters, million dollar talking heads, not so much.
9
Why is it so difficult?
Be critical of what you read or listen to and recognize your own bias.
9
@Tom Daley ,
THANK YOU!
"....the most powerful progressive on TV, the MSNBC host Rachel Maddow."
Rachel Maddow? the most powerful progressive on TV?
No. She is neither powerful, nor progressive.
Just another MSNBC mouthpiece serving her corporate overlords.
25
@ExPDXer
Yep ridiculous. And an attempt to hijack the movement into the media so they can speak for people who have no voice and silence them.
2
@ExPDXer
Read her book, "Blowout."
1
Bernie's views of the "corporate media" can be summed up as: the corporate media is able to manipulate those who vote against him, while by definition it cannot manipulate those who vote for him. Under this view, it necessarily follows that Bernie and his fans believe his supporters are smarter, while Biden's supporters are ignorant and gullible. As Bernie and his campaign well know, African Americans overwhelmingly support Biden - which make his implicit charges of voter ignorance and gullibility quite racist and consistent with a history of white elite condescension and paternalism towards blacks.
Ironically, while castigating elites and pretending to represent the working class, Bernie is as elitist as anyone when it comes to his views of the poor and minorities as a bunch of know-nothing ignorants who can easily be manipulated and need a benevolent parental figure to tell them what's best for them.
13
Joe Biden's Super Tuesday victory was made by the full spin force of the media. Rarely have so many been so influenced by so few to make so big a change of their minds.It was an upheaval tantamount to the victory of Goliath over David.
The media make our reality. They make our ethics and morality. The media make stars and presidents; the media break stars and presidents. They make it for profitable entertainment.
Free and brave people need to make up their minds independently.
31
@Lawrence Chanin
They with Clyburns powerful speech. Instead if showing how Clyburn saved him the articles instead focus on delegitimizing progressive policy as being rejected by America completely.
Incrementalism? Not a chance.
1
To add my small bit of clarification to the NYTimes article about the Bernie rally in Grand Rapids yesterday, where justice champion Jesse Jackson Jr. gave his historic endorsement : that article described the crowd as “predominantly white.” Presumably with the subtext of that’s the only composition of support for Bernie.
I was there. It was a diverse crowd of all ages and styles and smiles. I am Anishinaabek (Great Lakes indigenous), and believe me I notice when there is a sizable presence of tribal people, which there was. Many many young people (voting this Tuesday is the second chance of your lives) of all colors, elders, black folks, Latinos, and however else you might care to categorize the American people.
But we were not there to be demographically sorted out or separated. We were there to demand control over the well-being of our families and communities , free from the fear that profits-above-all-else will continue to decimate the health of our bodies and the planet.
Listen to the call and response led by Reverend Jackson. It was real and beautiful and the closest to a more perfect Union that I’ve ever had the honor to experience. A powerful meeting of hearts and hope. That is the true story of the Sanders campaign.
95
Big Media reflects The Establishment and plays favorites. And if there's anything it loves as much as its enormous profits, it's establishing narratives and expecting that they be followed.
Those who deviate from such narratives are either treated unfairly through how stories are slanted or are simply ignored. Groupthink remains the coin of the realm, and the ever-present corporate thumb on the scale tends to be unforgiving.
Ben Smith deserves credit for shining a light on the problem, but it's hard to imagine much meaningful change, at least in the foreseeable future, except at the margins. If indeed "the media landscape is beginning to shift," the pace will be glacial.
Once power is consolidated, there's no vested interest in sharing it. Establishment Media -- so dominant in "The Influencing Machine," as Brooke Gladstone calls it -- is quite comfortable being in the driver's seat.
15
The very same well-organized and well-funded forces that destroyed Jeremy Corbyn in the UK elections are now attacking the Bernie Sanders in the US election. ...... and the media is the weapon of choice.
The objective of these forces is to steer the public away from the subjects of international law and human rights as they may relate to the ongoing Mid-East conflict.
21
I can't wait to watch Trevor Noah on The Daily Show to really explain to me exactly what is going on. Yes, the comedians see the wisdom in spending 30 seconds to provide a cogent setup to a news story so that their viewers can be educated.
MSNBC and CNN are too busy BREAKING NEWS! about the latest salacious lies tweeted by our despicable President.
12
Bernie Sanders is correct, but the problem goes far beyond the anti-Bernie coverage. This newspaper has bent over backward to cover the Trump Administration (and 2016 Trump campaign) by presented carefully curated stories in which journalists present Trump's incoherent ranting appearances to make them appear intelligent and normal.
Just read the NYT article about Trump at the CDC to see how misleading it is compared the actual video of that event. No mention of the head of the CDC beginning with a stunning and frightening "Dear Leader" fawning statement about Trump. No mention of how incoherent and nonsensical Trump's comments were, and how Trump said multiple statements that simply were untrue. A US president appears and says multiple false statements, after being fawned over and praised by the head of the CDC, and this newspaper portrays Trump as - at worst - a bragging president who is very concerned about this new virus. No, Trump was an incoherent, dishonest mess and the CDC leader demonstrated with his fawning that his only concern was to remain in this incoherent, incompetent president's favor.
41
I’ll never forget how the corporate media, not least this publication, tore down Howard Dean after Chris Matthews, of all people, badgered him into admitting he would “break up big media if elected.”
How ironic that Dean himself, sixteen years later, would contribute to the Bernie pile-on himself!
26
The NYT buried Bernie’s candidacy announcement on page 19 during the 2016 election, while it assumed Hilary’s natural ascendancy — in spite of the economic condition of so much of the country and polls which showed Bernie to be a stronger candidate against Trump. Whether that was because of “corporate” involvement or just plain bias or both may be hard to sort out. It must be difficult to be a powerhouse media source and not think that throwing your influence around is a good thing. Although it’s traditional to do so, I am sure that’s different from journalism.
28
Sorry, but denouncing ‘blind support for female candidates as “lady boss yass queen feminism”’ is the reason so many educated women don’t like Bernie or his supporters, not the corporate media, and not the “establishment.”
19
@Vig I'm a feminist and a senior citizen. I'm not exactly sure what "lady boss yass queen feminism" is. If my guess that it involves supporting a candidate -- any candidate --primarily because he or she represents a specific demographic, I have to agree it's, well, for lack of a better description, ignorant. Feminism is part of the larger struggle for justice for all. A female candidate who is willing to compromise in the pursuit of justice for all, does little to advance the cause of feminism. A female candidate willing to send our sons and daughters to risk their lives to support the neoliberal pursuit of fossil fuel profits is a traitor to the cause of feminism. A female candidate who insists on moderate goals in combating the existential threat of climate change is a traitor to the cause of feminism.
5
I liked this piece for the most part but I had to double take when I read that one of the things the media gets “right” about Sanders is his “rigid attachment to the battles of an earlier generation.”
First off, this is a great example of how the MSM somehow twists Sanders’ consistency against him. All the whole, Joe Biden’s history of waffling and voting for right-wing policies (that have since blown up in the American peoples’ faces) is somehow an asset or a non-issue.
Second, and most importantly, the issues that Bernie speaks of are not “the battles of an earlier generation” — he may have been talking about them for thirty plus years, but that’s only because they haven’t gone away and have only gotten worse. From income inequality, the environment, protecting workers and womens’ abortion rights, etc., Bernie’s alarm-raising in decades past has only proven amazingly prescient and more relevant today than ever. He’s been right about the trajectory of these issues and how they would affect American life today.
I don’t think the authors meant it maliciously, but this is a prime example of the unthinking and tacitly anti-Sandersism endemic in the MSM. It’s the same line of thinking that — even 3 years into the Trump administration — treats Sanders as an unelectable outsider when his policies are broadly popular with the electorate. And worse, it’s the same line of thinking that leads to Dems to coalesce around a flawed Biden and sleepwalk into a loss in 2020.
68
@Austin And another point: How are climate change, student loan debt, and opposition to corporate-slanted trade deals like the TPP, all of which are key to his appeal to young people, "the battles of an earlier generation"? Bearing in mind that 2 of those are the direct result of decisions made by Bill Clinton's administration in the 1990's, and the other has been a bipartisan effort to refuse to act on established science for approximately 40 years.
I think what authors that write these kinds of lines are assuming is that just because Bernie is old, he must not be hip to the issues of the day. But the exact opposite is true: He's the candidate who is left in the race who is treating young people's problems as problems, and that's why young people support him in such strong numbers.
5
@Austin This is a great point. So income inequality, lack of affordable healthcare, the skyrocketing costs of an education are "battles of an earlier generation"?
I guess that means no one has been able to fix them. And Sanders continues to fight on these issues because he--a rarity for polticians--didn't give up/
5
Finally an admission of the journalistic malpractice that has been perpetrated against this nation by corporate media outlets.They literally are actively implementing a coronation of a Democratic Presidential candidate. Influence and opinion shaping are real phenomena.There are corporate boards, owners and media personalities who truly do not want fundamental change to the power structure that directly affect their pockets. This is the root of the overt bias that has been directed at the Sanders campaign. The fear mongering and negative coverage has taken root. However, try as they have, the talking heads, pundits and columnists have not been able to tarnish Bernie’s reputation for being honest, consistent and always being on the side of social justice.
27
As a very simple example: MSNBC is owned by Comcast. Bernie Sanders has a plan for publicly owned broadband Internet that would be very bad for Comcast. I'm sure that has absolutely nothing to do with the quite negative coverage he's been getting from MSNBC, to the point where his victories are being compared to Nazi invasions.
But really, all of this was completely predictable to anybody who has read "Manufacturing Consent".
36
Public disenchantment with corporate news media is not a generational divide. Several generations of people old enough to remember the quality of journalism before all the mergers and acquisitions, are equally skeptical and disillusioned. We know editorial decisions are now algorithms looking for click bait, that shareholders interests are a muzzle in the news room, as are corporate legislative agendas Supporting deregulation and anti taxation, If there is a new media emerging hallelujah. I will support it anyway I can, but be please stop doing the work of corporate strategists by perpetuating the racial, gender, and generational divides that are meant to keep us fighting with each other rather than collectively pointing the finger where it needs to be pointed.
21
@Maggie Here, here ... !!!!
2
Conspiracy theory thrives under ideological conditions. While I agree that “corporatism” is a danger if not “confronted,” it does not appear to me that “corporatism” is thoroughly unchecked. Sanders is a sensible guy who has a practical side, but ideological conditions are such that his campaign makes him appear thoroughly anti-corporate, hence anti-capitalist, which he’s not.
These conditions aren’t the creation of the political news media, which, indeed, are largely supported by corporate bodies. Members of those corporate bodies are as interested in fact, truth, and good judgment, certainly good business judgment (which is not synonymous with greed) as is every other grouping whose members are interested in living a decent life together.
The problem is ideology itself, not corporate ownership, nor “public” ownership.
1
Sanders is using the media to spread his totally misleading commercial which alleges that Obama is supporting Sanders.
It is shameful and rises to the level of Trump's gaslighting and lies.
There is very little doubt that Sanders' activities will help Trump's re-election campaign.
BTW I had voted for Sanders many times over the years.
15
@rocky vermont
All the other campaigns have Obama saying positive things about them. Going to say the same about them?
4
Mr. Sanders has been targeted by certain media organizations and pundits with the objective of preventing a Sanders presidency. In the NYT we see Mr. Sanders portrayed as an extremist, a radical socialist, an anti-capitalist. We see visuals of a wild man like the photo presented here. We see a tag team of columnists (Stephens, Brooks, Friedman, et al) taking turns in Bernie bashing.
Why do we see this?
One reason could be that Bernie Sanders threatens to make major changes in US foreign policy which would re-establish respect for international law, UNSC resolutions, and basic human rights conventions. Sounds good to most of us, but it would be a disaster for the extremists now driving Israel.
In my opinion, this is unprecedented and unacceptable foreign influence in the US electoral process.
26
@Greg I'm curious to know where I might find Sanders's pro-capitalist ideas. How does he see banks operating in the future? How does he see equity market trading in the future? I've looked around but haven't found much. I know he wants to raise pay and end fracking but what industries might thrive during a Sanders presidency.
1
@Greg If I - or anyone else - thought Sanders could defeat Trump, I'd vote for him in a second. Most of us are just pragmatic. Sanders is very uncompromising and I like that about him-- but it could never work with in our overly polarized government.
1
@Dee
Is there a contradiction in your complaint -- if the government is polarized why should "uncompromising' trouble you?
Bernie’s beliefs are well grounded and that is a virtue if anything.
Seldom the case with politicians.
2
I knew a guy in college, let's call him Mike. Mike was angry with everything that wasn't for Mike. Now, there were times that things or people worked out particularly badly for Mike and his gripes at those points were valid, but problematically, he took those moments as justification to be angry every time something happened that wasn't explicitly for him. So if a friend got good news, but it wasn't about Mike or didn't help Mike, he would say it's bad. Mike is what I see online from both Trump and Sanders supporters. There are valid critiques to make of the media, but that doesn't mean that your anger at the news not constantly promoting your boy is valid.
28
@Jason
I knew a guy in college. Had everything going for him. His family helped him through college and he had a comfortable life. He always believed he earned everything he had. Never saw the people who helped him to his comfortable seat in which he resided. He loved saying he was the voice of reason. Don’t make waves just keep things going as is. Life is good.
From the comfort of his soft comfy chair he loved criticizing people he didn’t understand to delegitimize their struggles because it might make him uncomfortable. And making him uncomfortable was rude and intolerable. After all he made it, believed he earned it so everyone can.
3
@Mathias,
I knew this girl. She took low wages at a supermarket and put herself through a undergrad at a city school. Payed her modest tuition out of her grad stipend while she got a PhD while working part time. She worked her way to a steady faculty position and now owns a home. No student debt. She wonders if free stuff will really fix everything.
Novelty leads to news coverage leads to name recognition leads to fundraising dollars leads to votes.
I hold the media responsible for relentlessly covering unviable novelty candidates, starting with Marianne Williamson but including Andrew Yang and Pete Buttigieg, at the expense of a whole cadre of experienced and qualified, non-geriatric senators and governors, any one of whom might have ably led this country.
How can we expect to elect a president we can respect if a major qualification is to be a People Magazine-style celebrity?
11
The Sanders rise in the primaries made the corporate media very uncomfortable. I watched as they mobilized to help the Democratic Party elites herd their audiences toward the Party’s chosen nominee.
It looked to me and many others, not just Sanders supporters, like media in one party states. Objectivity and letting the candidates tell their own stories went completely out the window.
How Do We Stop Bernie? Because he can’t stop Trump! Neither of those goals is their job. As a progressive, I have more in common with Trump supporters regarding the economic, political and media establishment than I have with the elite (and wealthy) and out-of-touch journalism of cable news and increasingly, the New York Times. Those new media sources are getting more and more of my attention these days.
39
“It looked to me and many others...” sounds eerily similar to “many people are saying...”
8
@Jazz Paw YES!!!!
1
Unappreciated is how their ongoing tag team pro wrestling match against and with Trump helps big for profit media, on the left and on the right, attract eyeballs and revenues and allows Trump to expose and shape his messages to constantly raise his celeb status (aka personality cult). Big media is a segment of the entertainment industry and Trump is, above all else, an entertainer. Anyone who thinks main stream media on the left -the owners, execs, "personalities," whatever - is working toward having him out of office a year from now hasn't been paying attention.
9
The most popular members of the media get popular by criticizing the media, which is ultimately self-defeating for press freedoms in this country.
4
Chis Mathews was let go because of his anti Bernie/communism rant. He’s made lewd comments to women his entire career, everyone knew what he was. There is a major problem in the media. Pretend journalist report what they are told. It’s obvious outside forces caused Mathews to leave because he follow orders.
11
It’s always hilarious to me when journalists wrap quotation marks around “corporate media” as if it’s not a perfectly accurate phrase to describe for-profit media.
31
To JP—Newsprint, reporters, ink, presses, computers, etc.etc. cost money. What national, secular print media is there that is non-profit?
2
Are you kidding? There are dozens and dozens of nonprofit media outlets across the country—print, online and radio in local, state and national markets. Many of them have produced some of the best public service journalism in the world. NPR, ProPublica, Texas Tribune, the Center for Public Integrity, to name a few national outlets.
9
In my earlier posted, I wanted to recommend Lionel Shriver's The Mandibles. Pandemics, economic collapse, authoritarianism etc. All happening when the media was a vehicle of amusing ourselves to an unconscious civilization.
5
Liberal news station reporting about union wins etc. Democracy Now! On PBS.
10
@Fannie
Democracy Now! is great, but it's not on PBS, it's independent.
https://www.democracynow.org/
12
Yep you are correct. It’s on pbs here in Vermont.
5
@SRF Some PBS stations broadcast it.
3
Now that the Times is convinced it has defeated the Senator it can afford to come out with minor supporting articles. Thank you not much.
Hillary's choice will probable be defeated by the monster's machine. She and her handlers are bonafide, authentic, guaranteed, money-back losers. Thanks to Diller & Getty help.
32
We all know the news media serves those who own it far more than those who read it, that’s why Trumps fake news bit has sticking power. The only difference is the Left is legitimately critiquing how it serves the moneyed, while the Right uses that notion to serve their disinformation campaigns. Ever wonder why we have a business section and not a labor section in the paper?
33
@Pessoa
Last sentence—good point.
But in your first sentence you use the phrase “far more.” Why? We don’t all know this. Profit is not synonymous with corruption—that’s ideological nonsense and ignores the history of business in the West and throughout the world. Business runs on market tested innovation, not greed and accumulation. Greed and accumulation have existed in every society, at all times, throughout history and efforts must always be made to control them (it’s the price of liberty, it’s been said).
You’re identifying the wrong enemy.
Although they say very little about the climate crisis or other environmental issues (and when they do it's just sensationalized nonsense, nothing ever about how Trump and the republicans are dismantling our minimal environmental safeguards or giving away our Public Lands to special interests) I somehow though as a Bernie supporter CNN and MSNBC were neutral. After super Tuesday I now see no difference now between them and Fox. And network news, and the local news is even worse. It took awhile, but I'm done.
23
@Mike
Agree 100%. And not just as a Sanders voter. It was DNC TV deployed as a Pravda-like force. The masks just got ripped off. They might just as well have worn Stop Bernie T-shirts.
11
@Mike Mike-- you obviously don't read the entire NY Times because they have a lot about what Trump is doing to undermine environmental regulations.
1
@Dee - No I actually do read the environmental stuff in the Times. That's why i believe Bernie is the best person going forward. I wish it were required reading before voting.
1
Bernie sounds like Trump - media paranoia. Bernie was the rising star until the voters went to the polls. He was the media darling until the little person spoke. He owned the debate stage with his monologues against billionaires (he’s only a millionaire), and corporate greed, well most of those voters work for corporate America, He tied with Buttigieg in Iowa and NH - even calling for an Iowa recount because rural Iowa did no support him. No one really care about the Iraq war vote, and many are for better relationships and international trade. International cooperation and open dialogue would have stemmed the coronavirus. We don’t need another ego centric person in the WH.
15
Trump has Fox to fan his alternate facts. The problem with Bernie is his alternate reality is a utopia of a commune. That is not as appealing in a capitalist republic.
2
The flaw in this reasoning is that there is nothing in life that is above criticism. That is why it is called life. Almost every solution causes another problem, so problems are always with us.
So Sanders has a point about something....this time the "media."
But what kind of world do we want to live in? One where all we "see" are the problems or one with balance....where we also see the vast improvements that have been made over time and in this country in the human condition?
In sum, he is a cranky old man. Life has battered Joe Biden around in a manner that Sanders cannot even comprehend. Yet Biden is more balanced. He sees the good and the bad.
That's what I want in a President. Balance. Not a Sanders, not a Trump. Someone who can smile on occasion.
17
@Travelers Seeing the president smile will be such a comfort when I'm still working at 75 just so the ultra-rich can rake in a little more of the wealth I help produce. I can't wait.
17
@Travelers
Sanders does smile, but in corporate media you're more likely to see photos like the one chosen for this article.
10
@SRF I have watched a LOT of Sanders. Nothing about him suggests he takes joy in life.
Here is a line from, of all places, the 1950s film Old Yeller:
After "Pa" gets back home, and finds out about Old Yeller, he gives a memorable speech to his son:
"Now and then, for no good reason a man can figure out, life will just haul off and knock him flat. … But it's not all like that. A lot of it's mighty fine. And you can't afford to waste the good part frettin' about the bad. That makes it all bad."
Sanders sees it all bad. He sees our country as all bad. Everything is bad bad bad. It is tiring and it is not true, nor wise. People want optimism, not gloom.
On his website, in the past, Sanders has said that the US is a "banana republic." That's what I mean.
He lacks balance as a person. And he will unbalance the US just as badly as Trump has for that reason--they are both the same personality.
Spot on. Some of us find it incredible that the MSM can line up with a candidate like Joe Biden who's always been on the right of the political spectrum, an esteemed friend of corporate big wigs, and who repeatedly touted his ability to work with unsavory politicians like Strom Thurmond. A man who actively worked against busing and pushed the tough-on-crime legislation in the 1980s and 1990s that proved disastrous for communities of color. And then, there's the Anita Hill thing and his confirmations of right wing judges to the SCOTUS.
It's no wonder that millenials prefer to get their news from sites like The Young Turks instead of CNN. At least those outfits make it clear that the pro civil rights candidate, the one who marched with MLK, is Bernie Sanders, not Joe Biden. They don't trust the mainstream media because it's owned lock, stock, and barrel by a greedy large corporate sector they hold responsible for making their lives difficult.
57
Perhaps Bernie Sanders is disliked in media circles because his proposals — implementing them, paying for them — don’t stand up under scrutiny... and asking questions means subjecting yourself to the scorn of his army of online trolls.
Also, for the record: people in the media don’t like Donald Trump, either; but that hasn’t stopped papers like the New York Times from normalizing and drawing false equivalencies to behavior that would have tanked any other modern presidency.
10
@Michael except they do stand up to scrutiny. Get out of your bubble, look to Europe or even canada to see similar policies work.
21
@Cal These systems work in Europe and Canada because they were created by the governments over decades, many politicians worked together to build the systems step by step. Bernie is selling a dream to the less informed, to people who think that one man, who hasn't accomplished anything in his life, can swing a magic wand once he becomes president and deliver free healthcare and education to all.
2
@Cal - I agree that the policies work. It’s the dogmatic rollout that shakes my confidence.
This is the one way to do it and it is important to do even if it costs more seems to be the message and the concern (at least for me) is that there seems to be little understanding of the many incremental steps it will take to even get our system ready for such a shift (like universal record keeping protocols) to the political process of passing the legislation.
The most important progressive action we can take this cycle to to fix gerrymandering and voting rights. Do that and the people will actually have a voice in down-ballot elections.
1
The corporate media hates Sanders because ads for prescription drugs are a huge part of their revenue. Follow the money. Sanders is pledged to end gross profiteering in the healthcare sector, and drive down costs for ordinary Americans.
Only one other first world country permits prescription drugs to be advertised freely on mass media: New Zealand. Everyone else rightly views it as unethical.
65
I have totally stopped watching mainstream news programs and discovered Rising some months ago. I feel like they speak respectfully to the truth which is that right or left doesn't matter - it's class interests/humanity and as Bernie says 'Which side are you on?' There are others as well - The MIchael Brooks Show, Rational National, Secular Talk, The Grayzone and The Intercepted. Bernie's campaign win (I hope!) or lose has pulled the curtain back on the corrupt Democratic establishment and on the dishonesty of the mainstream media and that is a win in itself.
23
Good article but it’s too little, too late for me. I have subscribed to the NYT for its excellent cultural, travel & food coverage. As an older Bernie supporter, your negative coverage of Sanders has reached WAPO levels of absurdity.
Even in this article your projection is patently obvious: “His weaknesses, from a rigid attachment to the battles of an earlier generation to his struggle to persuade older black Democrats to join his revolution, aren’t media inventions. They’re good, fair stories.” In the next billing cycle, I will be sending my subscription money to The Intercept, the Guardian & TYT.
74
@Spike I totally agree. Even the Washington Post covers him more fairly. I’m very disappointed with the level of bias of a newspaper I used to rely on.
7
@Spike Same here, except I'm going to send my subscription money to the Sanders campaign. As much as I love the cultural writing in the Times, I can afford to give that up. The Times' bashing of Bernie made me quit my subscription in 2016, and if Biden gets the nomination, I will never renew my Times subscription. Only non-corporate media will have my support.
7
Mr. Sanders has had quite a bit of positive coverage. This "corporate media" has barely vetted him! Needing his own media? Sounds very Trumpian. Scrutiny is to be expected when running for the highest office in the United States. Every candidate can expect to have to answer questions; Mr. Sanders doesn't get a free pass. No one does.
12
It’s not about left and right. It’s about up and down. Bernie’s got that pegged and for some reason the democrats closer to the bottom of the economic food chain are voting for Biden - wake up!
22
In any unsettled era, anti-capitalist capitalism is always going to be a good market play. No place will generate more foam and froth than the media industry. You want a revolution? We have a model to suit your uniquely individualistic style.
And then there is the existential angst of the entrepreneurs. In the beginning they are poor and desperate, legitimate proletarians one and all. Then they succeed and become rich imposters. The Jann Wenner syndrome. Much suffering and self-examination, all preserved for posterity on video tape .
Celebrity is intrinsically toxic. Hip capitalism is still capitalism. And who can ever forget The Monkees?
Change that endures pushes up from the bottom. Everything else is cosmetic.
3
Speaking as a journalist, I would say Ben Smith should know better than to insult the entire profession and rail at "the media" as if reporters are incapable of delivering fair and impartial coverage. And he should be aware of line between the ownership and the newsroom -- that's what allows him to express his (ridiculous) views
18
@Rob look at fox news. Big line there guy smh.
4
One thing I learned long ago was T.A.N.S.T.A.A.F.L. There Ain’t No Such Thing As A Free Lunch. (Yeah, double negative, I know, and “ain’t” was added to dictionaries a while ago.)
This applies to both journalism and politics. It comes from the olden days when bars would hang a “Free Lunch” sign in the window to attract patrons. But the bar owners figured out how many would partake and raised the cost of the drinks to compensate. Free things have a way of extracting something in exchange.
I don’t know of any mass market journalistic effort that can survive without some sort of corporate backing. Ya gotta pay for the talent. Journalism isn’t easy. Remember that when you read those free web news sites. They have to sell a lot of ads to cover the expenses, and they tend to track and adjust what they show based on your history to get you clicking more and seeing more ads. Heck, even PBS is supported by corporations through “donations” that get mentioned at the start and end of each broadcast.
A good, well written article requires a degree of professionalism that deserves remuneration. The best way for reporting, unaffected by corporations, is a pure subscription model. But that would tend to quickly lead to “preaching to the choir” or “... cannot open the page because the server cannot be found”.
6
Sanders has a notoriously prickly relationship with local media in Vermont. Isn’t that worthy of mention before the self-flagellation begins?
22
@Brian
Is Biden even running for office. I have read anything about him. Why?
I would love to see a liberal news station/paper, as long as it wasn't filled with hateful rhetoric and paranoia.
How about reporting on the good news on the left - union victories, teacher's strikes, community activism, exciting politicians at all levels of government, etc.
9
Where is this kind of introspection for Warren, Harris, Klobuchar – or Clinton? You reported on Warren's wardrobe and Klobuchar's salad. Bernie is fine. This is patriarchal fragility at its boldest.
21
@Dan Marshall
In fairness the media mentions Bernie's hair and his Kohl's brand suit. Also Trump's fake tan, Biden's face lift and Bloomberg's height. The point is we need to stop looking for ways to divide ourselves and look around at what is happening to our country and the world- Real Issues!
6
The MSM cable channels will have a financial reckoning when Trump leaves office. Take a look at their financial numbers prior to 2015 compare to the last 4 years. Expect a massive downsizing at these left falling (not leaning) channels.
If Bernie/Biden were the only news think how boring that would be and how unwatchable.
2
Who controls the past controls the future: who controls the present controls the past. Winston Smith edited newspaper articles like this one. There is nothing outside of Spectacular Society, truth and reality were all gobbled up by it long ago. Remember, the revolution will not be televised.
3
As the former democrat hopefuls drop like flies into the tank for Biden, I muse that their wealthy donors' aspirations won't miss a beat. Big tech, big pharma, fossil fuels (fracking, new pipelines, plastic manufacturing, etc.) all the corporations that have been given the status of people for donor purposes can breathe easier now that Elizabeth Warren (but not yet Bernie Sanders) has been sidelined.
Of course they can continue to count on Trump et al to do their dirty work. Whatever his shortcomings, he delivers for his oligarchs who return the favor. That includes the media whom he plays like a drum.
So Biden or Trump--Trump or Biden, we're in for more inequality of healthcare and education and less of our democratic right to clean air, water and food. Unless we wake up and demand our right to a government for ourselves and not for profiteers.
28
Don't watch news. Read it.
14
@Jenna
Don't do either.
2
Good suggestion. But the problem for most people is that reading news takes time investment, money, and cognitive effort. (Particularly the case if you want to read critically and want to read several sources).
2
This is the only article about this issue I have seen in the Times. Specifically the NYT editorial page has become pablum for news consumers. There is not one legitimate progressive in the stable. Yet we have three avowed right wingers (Brooks, Stephens, Douthat) filling these pages with right wing talking points every day. Where are the progressives such as Chomsky and Hedges? Sanders has been dealt a bum rap in this paper as have the important issues confronting the nation. Unfortunately, progressives have to ferret out information through other sources and rely on the Times for other topics such as Arts, Music,Books etc.
68
@Peter Thank you, Peter. I concur. Where's Chomsky? Where's Reich? Where was Judt when he was still alive and warned about the exact same things (e.g., inequality - see "Ill Fares the Land")? Where's superior intellect and clarity of thinking?
11
@Peter I can only name two fairly progressive columnists at the Times, Charles Blow and Jamelle Bouie. On the other side, besides the right wingers Brooks, Stephens, Douthat), there are columnists like Nicolas Kristof and Paul Krugman whose pretensions to espouse the causes of the poor seem to me to be hypocritical at best.
1
Here's a reality check: The latest Michigan poll shows this:
Biden 54% Sanders 33%
There aren't that many Baby Boomer and Gen X New York Times reporters in Michigan to account for a spread that big.
14
@A. Moursund you seem to be unaware that national media can influence voterss across localities. Many of these folks watch MSNBC and read news organs like the Times. My own parents a re obsessive MSNBC junkies who consume its "objective" news uncritically
5
I worked in media prior to Obamacare many producer associate producers and others had no benefits. It was all to make Wall Street happy. So below the high paid hosts there are many who hope Bernie succeeds.
19
Where is the mention of Latino support in Sanders’ strengths—and Biden’s weaknesses?
Fading to invisible again.
28
The liberal media gave Trump an abundance of free coverage in 2016, including his empty podium before rallies started, but blacked Bernie out. Noam Chomsky said it all about the media in his book “Manufactured Consent.” Bernie is right that the media are beholden to big money. No, he’s not following in Trump’s footsteps who played the media to propagate his message of hate.
26
As Noam Chomsky says, the media would much rather be critiqued from the right than the left. There is obvious bias in all mainstream media against progressive candidates and ideas.
Look, for example, at the overt skepticism with which Medicare for All and the Green New Deal are treated, compared to the enormous sums of money spent by the US military every year. See FAIR for extensive documentation on topics like this.
The mainstream media generally reflects the point of view of the US government and dismisses reformers whose opinions differ radically, unless those views are pro-business.
44
@Greg Ruben And you had to hear the Republicans and Trump tell it the media are only in continuously in the bag for the lefties
1
Lenin famously said ”cspitalists will sell us the rope which we will use to hang them.”
Something similar here with American media.
They think the public gives them lots of licenses - to provoke us, to showcase our views and even to mold them - but they go too far - and they get hanged.
I don't work any longer and have all day long to do my favorite things - read newspapers and write comments.
Even after making time for a daily regimen of a couple of hours at the gym - and rarely watching day time tv - I don't know who these folks are who have time to watch all this 'new” stuff on YouTube or alternative media.
This column of talking about media on one of the most respected news media of the world - NYT - brings to mind this recent covefef about Astros.
MLB players at the beginning of spring training were inundated by media to talk about it.
But after a couple of weeks of spring - it's all ”play ball.”
Something similar with most Americans - you can talk about media covering media only so much - eventually, most of us just don't have the time to consider all angles.
And forgive me, but most of us really don't care what media thinks about media.
4
Lenin famously said ”cspitalists will sell us the rope which we will use to hang them.”
Something similar here with American media.
They think the public gives them lots of licenses - to provoke us, to showcase our views and even to mold them - but they go too far - and they get hanged.
I don't work any longer and have all day long to do my favorite things - read newspapers and write comments.
Even after making time for a daily regimen of a couple of hours at the gym - and rarely watching day time tv - I don't know who these folks are who have time to watch all this 'new” stuff on YouTube or alternative media.
This column of talking about media on one of the most respected news media of the world - NYT - brings to mind this recent covefef about Astros.
MLB players at the beginning of spring training were inundated by media to talk about it.
But after a couple of weeks of spring - it's all ”play ball.”
Something similar with most Americans - you can talk about media covering media only so much - eventually, most of us just don't have the time to consider all angles.
And forgive me, but most of us really don't care what media thinks about media.
What stand out for me in this article was this paragraph...
Mr. Giridharadas said he wanted to make TV that is a rebuke to cable news as it now exists. “When you get to that level of television, everyone is prosperous at the table,” he said in an interview. “I’m not sure I’ve ever sat next to an uninsured person on television. I sit next to uninsured people on the subway all the time.”
Anand Giridharadas has been my favorite person to elevate the conversation, incredibly insightful and forward thinking, you should hear his TED talks...
Weekly program will be great, as for me I can just listen to him everyday.
I can't find anyone who is more than him brings it to the people.
BTW, I got his book as soon as it came out.
9
As someone who strongly disagrees with Sanders on some policies, I believe he is treated unfairly and most articles on him have a degree of opinion against him that is subtly intertwined with facts so tightly that it becomes almost impossible to distinguish the two.
He's an incredibly important and relevant voice in politics, and worth listening to so that those who agree and disagree with him can come out stronger. Corporate media is doing everyone a disfavor by attempting to sway opinion.
60
Interesting that the NYT endorsement of both Warren and Klobuchar apparently didn't mean much to voters. I never could figure out why they endorsed Klobuchar.
26
@Pat Boice
Maybe to balance out the early and inexplicably lengthy article on what a bad boss she was puported to be. A clumsy mea culpa? I found her to be a compelling candidate, but many times when I mentioned that in, people would say "but she's a terrible boss." She got smacked down early on by someone who appeared to have an agenda. So, for that and entrenched old guys, we have a horrible choice ahead.
7
The left-leaning mainstream media, including the NYT, wants badly for Trump to be defeated in November - With guidance from the democrat establishment it has been decided to coalesce around Joe Biden - To give Biden the best chance to win the nomination it is helpful to trash Bernie and his ideas, the same ideas the press hailed as great ideas recently - Basically the fix is in, Bernie is out and the media will do everything possible to ensure Biden is the nominee -
13
@Jim Smith .....Sanders has pretty much had a free ride in the Democratic primaries because everyone is afraid that if they alienate Sanders supporters they will fail to show up again in November. It is ok for Sanders to rant and rail against his opponents (they are all on the take from those filthy big corporations), but nobody mentions Sanders parise of Castro and etc., or his total failure to accomplish anything in 30 years in Congress.
10
@W.A. Spitzer
Sanders’s Comments on Fidel Castro Provoke Anger in Florida - NY Times
CNN - “ He stated to Cooper, "We're very opposed to the authoritarian nature of Cuba but you know, it's unfair to simply say everything is bad. You know? When Fidel Castro came into office, you know what he did? He had a massive literacy program. Is that a bad thing? Even though Fidel Castro did it?"
The point being of a dictatorship can do something right why can’t we? Doesn’t mean you support the dictator.
But it was an opportunity by those who want to attack to do so.
2
@W.A. Spitzer
Once again I'll post the same comment, because people such as yourself continue to parrot nonsense. Be better.
What has Bern accomplished:
Wrote 'n passed an $11billion HC Clinics Bill, serving an estimated 30 million citizens in 11000 rural and urban locals, ea. yr. Negotiated the $5 billion bipartisan Landmark Veterans Bill of '14.
Recently helped workers in the Fight for $15 win a doubling of wages. 350,000 Amazon workers, 60,000 Disney workers, 20,000 Wholefoods workers and more.
Restored $320 million in pension benefits to 130,000 IBM workers.
Passage of the first and only audit of the Federal Reserve in '10.
Passage of $3.2 billion Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy grants.
Stopping bailed-out banks from replacing US workers with low wage guest workers. Stopping the Postal Service from closing up to 15000 PO and over 100 mail processing plants, slashing over 100,000 jobs.
Passage of the National Affordable Housing Trust Fund Act.
Raising wages of Federal contractors to a min. of $10.10 hr. or more.
Created the Northeast Home Heating Oil Reserve.
Passed bipartisan Yemen War Powers Act. The first time in 45yrs. since it was first enacted. (DT vetoed it.)
To name but a few.
Research Bernie, The Amendment King. He passed more amendments under heavily partisan Republican controlled gov. than any other congresswo/man.
Here is a good story, and why you often don't hear or read about Bern and his bills... https://youtu.be/C08mO4BxRBs?t=10m20s
1
Every Op ed column I read in the most popular news papers, I take it with a grain of salt, since I have come to realisation that the media is subjected to same human weaknesse like partiality, blowing up somebody’s insignificant weaknesses while muting other’s deficiencies.
9
Are we really going down this road? After 3 years of a president complaining from bias in the media against him and the right wing, we are now claiming bias against the left candidate? The op-Ed at times seems upset that they are asking though questions about their candidate. They should. That’s the role of journalism. No matter who is running. I believed Barack Obama showed a significant amount of displeasure when being interviewed by Fox News or by Univision about his immigration policies. This is perfectly fine and should be protected. The media should serve as a space to be challenged (as well as universities but that’s a different story) not a place to be pampered.
9
@Jorge Mercado
But Obama was seldom pinned down on policy by liberal media. I liked Obama but feel he was often treated with kid gloves.
5
Who doesn't know that the Media is now a Propaganda Tool Of Elites and Big Corporations? Bernie Sanders is not for the Elites and Big Corporations, Bernie Is For The Big Us, The Ordinary People. So don't expect the media to write or say anything good about Bernie. Joe Biden is for the Corporate Elites and Big Money Interests, that's why you see the Corporate Media propping Biden up for failure in November 2020 again as they propped up Hillary Clinton for failure in November 2016.
31
@Ukosi
Anybody that uses capital letters for everything, clearly just simplifies life into bogeymen and heroes. No shades of gray, here, no sir.
9
It seems important to mention that, while this article says Sanders claims have more merit than the media admits, it doesn't say that he's right, and it focuses it's criticism on MSNBC and other cable news channels. Sanders may have some point, especially with MSNBC, but he still takes it too far, attacking reliable sources like the Washington Post based on weak claims meant to serve his agenda.
8
@Curran
MARCH 8, 2016
Washington Post Ran 16 Negative Stories on Bernie Sanders in 16 Hours
ADAM JOHNSON
Why Bernie Sanders Is Absolutely Correct About the Washington Post—and Corporate Media Overall
The fact that cable news pundits, anchors, and reporters rushed to vehemently defend corporate media against Sanders' comments is illustrative of the dynamic. It makes you wonder where career self-interest ends and sincere delusion begins. by Norman Solomon
If You're Looking for Evidence of WaPo Media Bias Against Bernie Sanders, Here It Is
Fairness & Accuracy In Media (FAIR) has been following this issue for quite some time, so we're happy to offer the evidence CNN and the Post claim is lacking. byJulie Hollar
The Washington Post’s Well-Documented Bias Against Bernie Sanders - Kevin Gosztola
Today's story about Trump's "cautious" approach to the coronavirus is a case in point. Why use the word "cautious"? It makes it sound like Trump would err on the side of keeping people safe. No, instead, he does not want to warn older people about travel risks. One could just as easily say his approach is risky! The Times makes judgments in its descriptions of events when it reports the news. Sometimes that language is overly generous to Trump, as in this case, and often it is deleterious to people like Sanders. You cannot say there's not a bias there.
32
I have been reading the Times for decades. Of course the news is slanted. In the 60's we used to call it "All the News That's Fit to Tint." They bang the drums of war with a ferocity that is breathtaking.
Their sons and daughters don't fight these wars, however. Rather, they're away at Harvard preparing to be the next generation that strategize such wars.
No one left of Biden will ever get a fair hearing. They love them their tired old bureaucrats: the Kerrys, the Clintons, the Dukakis's, the Bidens, etc. Losers, all.
Don't go any further than to ask whom they pick to cover the Sanders campaign. A person with ties to Bain Capital. Makes sense, right?
And no public editor! Nothing to keep them honest anymore. They'll monitor themselves, I guess.
I will also add that in terms of class struggle, remember that the Times loves its articles on yuppie couples who have only "a paltry million" to spend on a condo. What WILL the poor couple do? They very rarely, if every, cover a couple of native New Yorkers who have little in their bank account. Their values are exposed right there for all to see. Pablum.
Same with the stalwart "Liberals" of CNN and MSNBC. They comfort themselves by actually believing they are objective and fair.
All of them are delusional. Read Matt Taibbi if you want real criticism of the profession.
155
@TM
I think most have missed how the media is now just "selling". Sharyl Attkisson's book, "Stonewalled", outlined how corporate interests and profits now drive much of what the media reports.
For example, an investigation into someone that may hurt the corporation's interest in another line of its business will be stopped. NBC is a large corporation with many diverse interests to protect. Can it risk hurting a business line or angering a big advertiser?
Media has also become highly risk averse. It will parrot what AP and Reuters reports, and others what the NYT reports, believing it's a safe bet.
CNN and MSNBC are now running the equivalent of anti-Trump infomercials. Because that's what sells.
6
@TM Another excellent source of media analysis is fair.org (Fairness and Accuracy In Reporting), which notes consistent biases in media.
For example, NPR and PBS don't have liberal biases so much as an ongoing bias that nothing that they're reporting on might actually affect their audience in any significant way.
6
The criticism of NYT’s Bernie coverage voiced here by commenters is clearly legitimate.
What’s ignored by those commenters is the NYT’s similarly diminishing/damning coverage of Warren and, yes, HRC - particularly when they were front-runners.
That doesn’t fit into the commenter paradigm of boomers vs millennials. What does it fit into? I don’t know, but so far it’s led to a Trump presidency. Let’s hope it doesn’t continue to be so self-destructive.
21
@James - It’s not boomers vs millennials. It’s establishment capitalists vs anything to the left of Biden, especially if it comes from a woman. See supposedly serious discussions about whether Warren is electable because she is a woman. I’ve been hearing that sort of contemptible prejudice for more that 50 years and some people still can’t see that if you seriously have to ask yourself that question, then you have your own answer. Stop, already.
8
@MJM
Your superciliousness has interfered with your ability to understand my point. Stop, already.
1
The same slant, the same fake news that this article speaks of - it exhibits itself!
"He had been avoiding the network, suspicious of its wealthy hosts and corporate owners."
No - he was avoiding the network because he knew they had an agenda. They were trashing him, It was obvious. Not because they were evil corporate media, but because they are Democrat establishment loyalists, not liberal loyalists, or dare I even say - reporters!
CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, and others have an agenda. They arent reporters. Theyre activists.
So Bernie gets to trash the media because hes "suspicious of its wealthy hosts and corporate owners."
And thats ok. That deserves some modicum of respect.
But when Trump trashes them, its because they are asking him tough questions, or theyre telling the truth, or hes lying.
You cant trust them. Any of them. They slant their reporting to create narratives and lead you down the garden path. They make big deals over some news, and ignore others. They arent reporters. Theyre activists.
15
Amazing to me how the Mass Media spun Bernie's comments on Cuba,in answer to Anderson Cooper's "investigative" question.No where did I see any mention of a speech Obama made while President,praising Cuba's Educational System and Healthcare.Just look at it on you tube.Obama was much stronger in his praise of Cuba,than Bernie. Yet the way Mass Media spun Bernie's comments, you would think Bernie is pushing for a communistic government in America!
63
@Nora
The media was terrifically cautious when it came to covering Obama.
5
@HotGumption
Cautious? Interesting word. The media covered for Obama, in my opinion. Can still remember NYT's hilarious excuse for Obama's "Lie of the Year." It claimed he simply "misspoke" when he promised, repeatedly, that we could keep our doctors and plans.
5
This article fails to mention clearly that Vice Media is big for profit media. I think to be transparent the article should
mention that Vice is owned by Disney and Fox.
10
@Ben Rosenzweig
That's what money does. It buys voices to silence them. Like re-education camps for media companies.
3
@Ben Rosenzweig Yes, I’ve had a look at Vice and the Hill. Just looked like more propaganda, but from a different perspective.So I’m not surprised by what you say.
1
Just what we need, a left wing Fox News. Just when you thought it was safe to take off your tinfoil hat. Try to remember that Fox viewers think they're getting the "truth" that the MSM is trying to hide. While it's probably true that the hidden persuaders are alive and well, left right, and center, lets keep in mind that what's needed is not so much more media as more critical thinking.
11
In the early 20th century, radical texts proliferated among the working class in New York alone. Today, with the advertising-based model of journalism, you’re lucky to see genuine leftists represented in the mainstream media, which hardly ever questions state power. When Bernie said Castro instituted successful literacy and health care programs, the dismissive reaction was predictable because it’s taken as an article of faith that anything but the status quo in this country is unacceptable. What readers need to be particularly concerned about is what’s not written or talked about. To be an informed citizen, you need to read widely, including international sources, for a deeper or alternative perspective on what this country is doing in your name.
24
@AlNewman
Sadly very few people take citizenship responsibly. Vert few look for legitimate news, fact check anything or research candidate public records. This makes a representative Republic r any kind of democracy problematic and opens the doors to corporate rule, charismatic hucksters, and fascistic dictators.
2
The real issue is that most media today promotes an Opinion.
20
Nothing could be more clear than your statement.
4
I would like to second the recommendation for "Hill Rising." Krystal Ball and Saagar Engeti present a nice balance of progressive and conservative viewpoints, but are in agreement on the existing threats to our endangered "democracy." They previously served within the corporate media and know what they are talking about.
14
Here's a bold idea America: Do your own research. Why do you need MSNBC or FOX News to tell you how and what to think? Read respectable outlets like the Economist, the WSJ and the NYT. Read them all, fact check and then watch the talking heads for breaking news. Watch the opinionators too, but with informed skepticism. NPR and NPT are great sources of information. Most importantly, stop crying about not getting news tailored to your political bias. Look for the truth, instead, and learn to think for yourself.
16
The whole point of this article is that so-called respectable outlets like the NYT and WSJ are in fact heavily biased.
6
@ActMathProf No kidding. That's why you start there and then do more research. The whole point of my comment was to use the tools available to find the truth.
Again, crying about bias is a waste of time.
I applaud this article for seeing what many of us see. Unfortunately, I go to the NYT Opinion section right now and what do you know, I see an article titled “The Dangers of Medicare for All.” The media doesn’t learn its lessons and then every so often, concedes it got everything wrong. And then they do it all over again. You can’t read the NYT without seeing multiple articles a day about how dangerous Bernie Sanders is, how universal healthcare and policies the rest of the world has are radical, and how we should all be thankful for the status quo. Will I say this is the reason Bernie will likely lose? No. But you can’t possibly say this doesn’t deeply impact the worldviews of readers when they are constantly exposed to these delusional and privileged perspectives constantly.
It’s not about reading things that tell you everything you want to hear. It’s about journalists and pundits tending to be older, whiter, more affluent, and in more of a bubble than the average person and often being oblivious to how the average American is living today. Not only that, but there’s no curiosity to even attempt to understand why millions have been drawn to Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders. This centrist bias and preference for the status quo in media is a feature, not a bug. Unless you start hiring more diverse writers and columnists, this will continue to happen. And we will be long done with you by the time that happens.
57
Biden seems to have no actual agenda or appeal except a return to 'normalcy'. That won't be enough. He will have to convincingly adopt some of Bernie and Warren's ideas in order to win.
26
@bob farkas
Yes.. but he won’t get elected promoting them...slow and steady
Great American philosopher Robin Williams..Wow..reality what a concept...
Reality will top ideology in the long run...
1
The elephant in the room when it comes to media attention is Elizabeth Warren - and there is no mention of how she was treated in this piece.
She finished third in Iowa - only to have the news break away from her speech. She announced a detailed plan for M4A - which the media used for ammunition against her because she actually gave them details where others hadn’t. The Wall Street Journal did a poll - and deliberately excluded her.
The net effect was to silence her and render her campaign invisible - which boosted fears of electability. She was one of the brightest, most capable candidates in the race. She was also the one who was the biggest threat to the status quo with her calls for big structural change and the need to go after corruption.
So let’s not talk just about the flaws of horse race coverage - let’s talk about one of the things that put Trump in the White House. He was good for ratings.
When Warren talks about the corruption of money, it’s not just in politics.
45
A sample of Times headlines from the last few days:
“The Simple Reason the Left Won’t Stop Losing”
“The Dangers of Medicare for All”
“Bernie Sanders Won Michigan in 2016. Tuesday’s Primary Looks Much Tougher."
“Sanders is Behind With Black Voters. He didn’t fix that in Flint”
Relentless negative coverage is working, I'm sorry to say. I've had a few conversations with friends who say they think Sanders has the right policies, but they are afraid he can't win. Where did they get that idea?
163
@Bunk McNulty
Don’t forget “As Bernie Sanders Pushed for Closer Ties, Soviet Union Spotted Opportunity”
34
@FB Yes, that was, in its own way, hilarious.
12
@FB
Yep. Plays into the demographic that votes for Biden. Reinforcing their belief he is an extremist.
2
Regarding the article about Trump shunning Pelosi's invitation to a Saint Patrick's day luncheon, you have once again scored. I learned two very important facts; Trump is sending Mulvaney to Ireland to bad mouth me before my case comes out, but more important, myself not being ethnically inclined, learned that Reagan was Irish. That's a real biggie. Thanks.
1
So is the media slanted against women? Or it against Bernie? Or is it against diverse voices? Or against people over 70?
Or is it against me?
5
It is against you and Bernie.
10
For Sure - MSNBC and other such, are peopled with wealthy hosts who clearly are in the tank for Biden.
20
@Dart: Thus dies the fiction - and it's always been complete fiction - that MSNBC is a Fox of the left.
2
Well, well. Finally an article on the hatchet job MSM is doing to reasoned debate for the good of all, Sanders, vs all for me, Trump.
24
I'd like to know Krystal Ball's prediction of the outcome of the Presidential election, and whether Krystal Ball's parents named her Krystal, or if Krystal Ball is the result of taking on the name of a spouse, or a stage name.
I'd like to believe that parents with the surname "Ball" would not name their daughter "Krystal".
9
@DJS
It’s her real name. Her father was, is, not sure, a physicist who studied crystals. He got to name her, the youngest.
5
@DJS Begin the smears.
2
@FB
Thank you for your response.I am surprised that t Krystal Ball's father named his daughter Krystal, given that the family surname is "Ball" while his the father having been, or being a physicist who studied crystals explains his choice of the name Krystal.
The name Krystal Ball reminds me of a neighbor child whose name was Candy Barr.
Thanks again for the clarification and explanation.
1
The media got this primary terribly wrong. They were so fixated on identity they missed the story completely. That story? Democratic voters are just not that into their party's leftwing. The media was fixated on the gender, sexuality, etc., of candidates who were never going to win.
They got one thing right, though. Biden was in big trouble. He's senile and was sinking fast. Now Bloomberg's money will revive him. To get it, he'll do exactly what he's told to. He's the new "puppet" candidate.
19
I’ve been watching Krystal and Saagar since late last year. For sheer intelligence, honesty and fairness nothing on MSNBC comes even close. Actually that’s a vast understatement.
23
As is often said, those who control the information control the decision. Sanders may be right on point here when he discusses the consequences of the ownership of our major media sources.
25
The problem is clear: the media in the United States is little better than a shill and cheering section for global and domestic capitalism, and sees even the mildest form of democratic socialism as a threat to its masters. Viewing the American media as a whole, one would think that Mr. Sanders, a very moderate socialist at best, is Lenin preparing the Bolshevik storming of the Winter Palace.
51
It is interesting that you mention corporate media vs left wing media or not for profit media. The answer is not corporate media vs the world (interestingly you don't mention NPR or PBS as two examples of not for profit). The discussion should not equate corporate media with right wing but rather media whose job it is to report the facts. I have long since stopped reading editorials and OP-Ed's, as much as I respect Tom Friedman or Gail Collins, they are just other people's opinions usually without facts or only t hi ose that support their position.
I know that we all filter the world through our own prism, but just report the facts, not corporate or left wing vs right wing.
3
Poor Bernie, everything and everyone is out to get him. It's all a conspiracy by the media and the DNC. Obviously voters are senseless because the only and correct option is to vote for Sanders.
It's funny how the commenters (who are overwhelmingly pro-Bernie) believe the NYT is moderate and centrist, when most of the articles on this site have a progressive bias.
Bernie and his team should continue to work on his "ground game" in the remaining states if he really wants the primary season to swing back in his favor. Railing against the media and news outlets is only going to hurt him more.
24
Aside from the NYT, few media entities have changed with the times OR they haven’t changed in the right way. CNN used to be a bit like PBS but with a bigger budget. Then Jeff Zucker came along and it’s now 95% panels of pundits and experts saying inane things. Instead of holding to the basic tenets of journalism they want to be “an entertainment”. But nothing ever lands with the impact of say, a Mike Wallace exposé on “60 Minutes”. It’s mostly fluff because real journalism takes time and it is heavy stuff ...the 24 hour news cycle is long and likes to be light on it’s feet.
While journalism and entertainment don’t necessarily have to be mutually exclusive there is nothing particularly journalistic (or authentic) about a glorified news reader sharing their opinions of something.
11
Even in your examination of Sanders critique of the corporate media you show your bias. You join the mainstream media in equating Sanders critique with Trump? Outrageous. Your look at alternative media never mentioned “Democracy Now” which has over 1500 outlets and primary election night coverage was far more professional and engaging than the garbage put out by MSNBC and CNN. Krystal Ball is progressive but she is no Amy Goodman and Juan Gonzalez? “A rigid attachment to the battles of an earlier generation” come on now what hypocrisy the issues championed by Sanders have mainstreamed and even been adopted by the establishment democrats to try to offset growing support for Sanders. Perhaps the NY Times editorial board’s is embarrassed that Warren and Klobuchar who they endorsed fell short and have dropped out of the race because they could never capture the mass support gathered by Sanders. Win or lose the primary Sanders has already helped the American public understand that corporate media try to in the words of scholar Noam Chomsky to “manufacture consent.” I encourage all progressives to engage alternative media like Democracy Now, WBAI, Intercept, Common Dreams, and even less so NPR than the corporate slaves at MSNBC and CNN. I stopped getting my news from these corporate sites long ago because I grew tired of the lies and distortions.
28
@Howard: the trouble with NPR and PBS news is the envy for the status of the corporate MSM. They're both primarily lightly edited MSM, with an occasional revealing investigative piece that slipped through the cracks.
The days of Bob Edwards are long, long, long gone.
1
I stopped watching cable news long long ago. Since the advent of the internet and the decline of print media there has been some serious consolidation of news outlets in general. Consolidation has lead to dwindling competition which has resulted in what we have today. That being a narrowing of the narrative down to two competing views where no others can live. The NYT, et al, is a perfect example. Back in the print days the NYT had a much more diverse philosophy where opinion took a back seat to straight news. "AlI The News Thats Fit To Print" is exactly the opposite today. Now opinion is front and center. The most damming thing I can think of is that Bernie gets better treatment from, of all people, the Twitter-In-Chief, than he does from the opinion pages of the NYT. Shame on the NYT! And although this token article acknowledging Bernie's truly uneven treatment in the media is nice it only recalls a certain nostalgia for what once was.
24
@Citizen we got rid of cable tv back in 2009. Peace quiet serenity lives in our heads.
5
@petey tonei
I never bothered with cable television. I wish, though, that I could have a one-way telephone line, i.e I could make calls, but no one could call me.
3
This is interesting. The writer is probably a baby boomer, because he doesn't know that the NYT used to be the voice of the Eastern Republican establishment. It is still anti unionized labor, particularly when it involves teachers unions or other municipal unions. Why else would it be such an enthusiastic supporter of charter schools?
3
Unlike the accusations by Trump, who got more coverage than all other candidates combined in 2016 what Sanders says is sadly accurate. We have a biased media connected t party insiders and embedded in the National Security State. The Times, is an example of the limits and bias that plague US media. If you want news, look to a few non-corporate sights like the Intercept, Truth Out, or Coon Dreams or look outside the country to the BBC or DeutcheWelle.
9
For corporate media, the problem is more of omission – the news we do not hear or read. Samples of things you probably haven't read about or seen on TV include the toll of civilians, including children, killed in Yemen or Gaza with US weaponry, the real numbers of those killed by our drones or the IDF, the ongoing strike against slave labor in our prisons, our growing military presence in Africa, the massive violent repression happening in India. As a group of scientists recently complained, the true extent and speed of our growing climate disaster is under-reported.
So do we have a free press? Yes, we do – not the embedded corporate mainstream media but the reality that we have alternatives and institutions that monitor, fact check and correct them like FAIR and the Columbia Journalism Review, Common Dreams and Intercept. The news is out there but you have to look beyond your TV and corporate paper.
14
Spot on, but look at the photo the editors have picked, of the "angry Bernie." There are plenty "smiling Bernie" photos or Bernie kissing babies to choose from, but the editors had to choose the stereotype they have created. It only validates Smith's point, sad.
38
No seriously where are the stories covering his Michigan rallies from yesterday, Fri. and today? I live a very easy drive from all three locations and I couldn't and can't find coverage in "local" or national news...just a very brief synopsis on local TV news on Grand Rapids last night.
I thought all the Bernie Bro whining was just that. But it's not. The media either decimates or completely ignores him. Seriously.
46
@Snow Day Yes, and scant coverage anywhere of Sanders' endorsement yesterday by Jesse Jackson, whose historic insurgent campaigns served as the model for Sanders'.
20
@Beulah
NPR reported last week that Kent County, home to Grand Rapids, Michigan's 2nd largest city where Bernie held his rally yesterday, is the swingiest of swing counties not just in the swing state of Michigan but in the entire U.S. of A. You* mean to tell me this isn't newsworthy? A candidate for president holds a rally here and no one covers it? Amazing.
* Not you, per se. You know what I mean.
Seriously!
3
Let's get somethging clear, this being that overall the media has been kind to Sanders, never, Never! during these past four year, calling Sanders out for his one-trick-pony, non-stop mining of the past couple of Millennial generations drowning in Student Loan Debt for their vote.
Take a good look at Sanders' polling numbers to realize the majority of the electorate are not drowning in Student Loan Debt and see no need to support him, viewing Joe Biden as the candidate to oust Trump and Co. from our White House,
this majority slice of the electorate realizing times a wasting as they watch Trump either from behind a podium at his rallies or working the rope line on the South White House lawn before he boards his helicopter, how much of an early jump Trump's gotten this 2020 election cycle.
And even though he's begun calling Biden 'Sleepy Joe' and trying to associate him using his son's Burisma involvement, what's really scary is how affectively Trump's framing Sanders, calling him out as a Socialist, castigating him, warning his Base-of-Support, Sanders will crash the Markets and lose everyone's 401K's if elected.
And believe this, his strategy has legs and possibly ensures Trump a victory come November if Sanders wins the Democratic primary nod.
9
Never more apparent than 2016 when the presidents of Fox News and CNN both congratulated themselves on a wonderfully profitable year. Eisenhower warned of a military-industrial complex, which now exists in every state and guarantees near perpetual life for every boondoggle and essential tool alike. Sanders may not have named it, but the US suffers under an entertainment-political complex every bit as influential, monied, powerful and corporatist as any aircraft maker. Why do we have perpetual campaigns? Why does the average congressperson spend 2/3 of their time raising money, and I don’t mean on the chamber floor advocating or resisting legislation? Why did the last Democratic debate look like a Maury Povitch daytime show, just without big guys in polo shirts pulling angry contestants apart?
No rational person believes that the amounts of money needed for TV, mailings, staff, etc. come unattached to expectations, some of which may be more than hoped-for? And who is paid for all this? The media. And who are the owners of media? How much overlap exists among the (untelevised, un-streamed) members of that cocktail circuit of the donors and the paid? The rest of us just send small donations. And hope.
21
@AnthonyB very well said, and so true! There are no alternatives to the Society of the Spectacle, unless...
1
For the past few weeks the cheerleading for Biden on MSNBC was clear as day and in no way even pretending to be neutral. It shouldn't be too much to ask for some degree of a level playing field during primaries and national elections.
The media is addicted to controversy, calamity and hysteria. It's never been more clear. Fear equals ratings and profit.
Now hurricanes, floods, tornadoes and politics in rapid succession aren't dramatic enough. Throw in some full blown worldwide panic and hysteria. We need the ratings.
A prescription for record media profits at the expense of all else.
22
Bernie's big mistake is not positioning himself as an FDR, JFK,LBJ democrat and even a partly IKE republican thus educating the voters that his policies are practically identical to theirs. People, especially those who lived through the cold war, don't distinguish between communism and socialism,much less the nuances of democratic socialism.
Naturally, the corporate media is not going to do this.
6
@Peggy Conroy if you’ve been listening to Bernie, he is FDR/LBJ and most importantly MLK wrapped up into one- like this article says, the MSM has painted him in another light completely.
3
In college, as the drum beat towards the Iraq War became deafening, and Jon Stewart was among the only voices of reason to be found, I wrote an essay about how all the major broadcast networks were owned by multinational war profiteers. Has anything changed?
28
Stating the obvious: there is no for profit media company that will support taking money out of politics; therefore, there is no media company that will support a Warren, Sanders or a candidate that is willing to take on corporate America and the 1%.
Let's face it money in politics is the bread and butter of news executives, news presenters, and media stock holders.
32
Those of us who grew up in the radio and television business in the mid 20th century remember the Equal Time Rule and the Fairness Doctrine which insured some semblance of balanced coverage of political campaigns and public issues. Both rules were trashed under the guise of First Amendment violations. The industry was also regulated by the rules of 7. No broadcaster could own more than 7AM,7FM and 7TV stations and no one could own more than one TV station and 1 Am and 1FM in a single market. The elimination of these rules and the advent of unregulated cable television is what allowed the transformation of individually owned local media into corporate conglomerates. Those of us operating under those former strict rules clearly knew the responsibilities of operating in “ the public interest “ and the industry clearly held itself to a “professional” standard and took the responsibility of “fairness” seriously. There is no turning back the clock but being a professional then meant playing by the rules. It was a good time to be a broadcaster. Corporate media’s lobbying over the years got exactly the un-regulated industry it wanted. The question to be asked, is the “ public’s interest” being served? The issue is far greater than Bernie or Biden or Trump.
26
@Gordon Hastings
Well said, Mr Hastings. The de-regulation of radio and TV has not been in “the public interest” as the commercial success of Fox News has lead others to follow it down the rabbit hole of entertainment news which requires not just news but conflict. Prime example being the recent Democratic debates in which the moderators of each debate it seemed were more interested in eliciting conflict than positions.
17
Thanks. MSNBC’s entertainment “news” as an example has , in my opinion, severely damaged the reputation and credibility of NBC News overall. I remember the stature of Chancellor, Huntley, Brinkley and NBC’s worldwide news bureau’s with seasoned, expert reporters who had a diplomat’s knowledge of the region that they covered. I also remember the corresponding NBC Radio News Network that shared many of the same correspondents. Highly profitable? Likely not. NBC founder Sarnoff’s philosophy was that Broadcasting could be the great educator of the American people. At one time the industry nearly attained that ideal. I doubt that Comcast has little knowledge of that legacy.
1
Positive coverage of Sanders in popular media has been missing. Not one channel or newspaper has described what Democratic Socialism is. Pundits seem to wind each other up, and end up agreeing that Sanders is somehow too abrasive, too rigid or, wrongly, call him a Socialist.
One would think that, at least in the left-leaning media, some shows or newspapers would support Sanders' progressive agenda. He's not calling for anything outlandish, only healthcare, childcare and educational opportunities that are available in Canada and Europe.
Sanders' attachment to years-long political justice battles are not absurd, it has simply taken those many years for voters to finally listen to him. If Obama hadn't been President, would older black Democrats join Sanders' revolution. Younger black voters have.
Before Super Tuesday, Sanders was polled to beat Trump head-to-head. He's important to bringing social and environmental justice back to the U.S.
Journalists and T.V. pundits are very influential, and frequently do not bother to label their biased remarks as personal opinion, not fact-based news.
Given Sanders' importance in this race, he deserves as much unbiased, or even favorable media time, as Biden has received.
92
If Sanders still has "deep popularity" with young voters, why aren't they turning out for him?
Nobody dislikes the corporate media more than I do. Cable News elected Trump (with help from Hillary Clinton and James Comey). But how else could one cover Biden's remarkable comeback on Super Tuesday?
The best thing to happen in media this year is the dismissal of Chris Matthews. Should've happened a decade ago. And yes, Biden is the Chris Matthews of politics. But Trump is far, far worse. Biden can beat Trump. Sanders cannot carry a single Southern state, which means he can't get to 270.
Sanders is a hectoring, egotistic, bombastic demagogue. That doesn't mean he's wrong about all the issues. But he's simply too abrasive, and too far left, for most voters. His support is declining from 2016. Tomorrow will be his Waterloo.
The left has got to realize that's it more than the packaging that keeps it from winning. People just don't like woke elitists who want to reach into their pockets to pay for things like health care for illegal immigrants and similar nonsense.
20
Go look at the photo adjoining the transphobia in Britain article. That's what television does. I can't know for sure whether Television is going to spark a world war, or simply drive humanity to insanity.
6
What Bernie Sanders and his supporters really want is a group of left-wing media outlets who will be as biased on the progressive side as Fox News is on the right-wing side and MSNBC on its favoritism toward centrists. Does anyone truly believe that a left-wing cable show would be "fair and balanced?"
11
Uh no. Life isn't symmetrical. Sanders is behind truth. Trump and fix are behind lies. See the difference?
15
This article may have saved my subscription which I’ve seriously considered canceling all week. The press and DNC heartbeat for Biden feels like it’s made possible by a pacemaker. As if the post-war generation that grew used to the advantages of capitalism’s loopholes and extremes just wanted to keep stealing from the generations after them and keep insisting its practical. Sanders gives hope, in part, because he is an exception to that rule on top of having practiced his values his entire life. I can hardly believe there’s an political article in this paper that’s as bravely honest as he is. More of this please.
86
@Manny - I cancelled my subscription and honestly because at this juncture have little faith for the NYT to be objective and actually engage on the issues. As I wrote to the newsroom, I joined scores in supporting a free press that would be unafraid to interrogate the truth fairly and objectively. Instead, in their political coverage this primary season, I seem to have only paid for panic. Sure, an article every now and then like this may suggest that they are for good journalism — but it’s come a little too late for me and I view it as nothing more than scraps being thrown at discerning readers who care for good reporting and analysis. My cancellation of my subscription may not mean much, because it is barely going to make a dent in their bottom line. But it was important to me that I did that, as a sign of personal protest. Only a real dent to their bottom line may help the Times wake up to the ideals of good journalism.
8
@Manny
This is a bread crumb.
They do it every time the marketing division tells them readers are canceling.
They know.
They don't care.
This yo-yo, cat 'n mouse game has been going on for decades.
The mouthpiece for the corp., MIC, .001% hasn't and won't change.
I'm with you Leticia, mine is up in April. I won't be renewing.
4
“And in 2020, far more than in 2016, the media has also captured his strengths: his consistency, his commitment to the poor, his deep popularity with young people.”
And so begins the “actually we were quite nice to Bernie and all our criticism was fair” narrative.
34
Good article. The inability of my fellow citizens to differentiate between entertainment and education has been the bane of my life. Who ever thought Rush Limbaugh would get the Medal of Freedom?35 years ago when a friend asked if I listened or liked Limbaugh I laughed and said “he’s very entertaining.” It diffused my friend’s nascent gullibility. In 2017 he proudly went to Trumps inauguration. I guess I was gullible thinking Americans could see past labels like “socialist” and realize they were being played. They can’t. So here comes their candidate, Joe Biden. Thank you so much, American media.
31
Thank you, Mr. Smith. A good article with many good comments. We vote tomorrow in Florida. I will be voting for Bernie, thanks to this article. I voted for him in 2016, followed by my reluctant vote for Hillary after she won the primary.
I’ve wanted to support Biden but I do see him as a male Hillary, i.e., a Republican in disguise. Maybe if Bernie ran with Elizabeth they could see up the nomination.
I’m 64 and a white male. I’m a lawyer who supports civil rights and represents workers/employees, not corporate employees. Our family is well off compared to most, but I will be working until I’m 70 if my health permits. We don’t have sufficient savings to maintain our lifestyle if I were to quit working now.
Our 31-year-old son has struggled with opiate addiction. He didn’t finish high school and he’s currently unemployed. He is living in a different economy than we are even though he’s only a few miles away. I don’t see how he or his contemporaries can ever get ahead with this status quo.
I’m voting for Bernie.
87
@Scottapottomus bravo, you’re a brave person, and see the truth here! Good luck to you!
9
I just watched Krystal Ball on the Hill via youtube.
I had given up hope that anyone in the media had a clue about what was actually going on in these elections.
She is fabulous--and thank you for directing me to her. After years of watching MSNBC, I gave it up a year ago, and have not regretted it.
29
If there's any merit in this muddle of a commentary, I fail to see it.
Bernie Sanders has gained far more mainstream press coverage than his campaign of warmed over "revolutionary" ideas from the 1960s deserves. In blaming the press for his lack of appeal, Sanders is just another side of the same coin that animates Donald Trump.
The modern mediascape is incredibly diverse, but much of it is populated by opinion sites masquerading as "news." When Rachel Maddow or Sean Hannity break a story like the Times reports on voter suppression or Trump's tax dodges, I'll be impressed.
Media consumers gravitate toward outlets that validate their opinions. They don't *want* to be challenged.
14
Seems like a perfect environment for the polarization police to increase the distance between Sanders and Biden supporters.
They have perfected this low art and will deploy it as necessary to prevent Democrats from uniting.
5
As a television program host, I found this article to be very interesting. I'm not sure that creating policy-specific media outlets is a particularly good idea, but above all, I find myself chuckling at the fact that one of the sources for this story is called Krystal Ball. Her parents sure had a sense of humor when naming her.
6
This is why I support “Common Dreams” as a NO-Advertising outlet featuring many progressive writers whose work is inspiring and intellectually challenging.
9
I stopped watching cable news because of the anti-Biden bias. The reality is that media follow the front runner. When Sanders was ahead, the question was who could overtake him.
The Sanders campaign now wants to blame the media for its losses. He spent the last four years trying to gain traction with the African American base (the older voters who vote in higher numbers). It didn't work.
THAT is because he reduces race issues to class issues, an offensive position to many African Amercans. The media correctly captured that.
13
@Point of Order
In all fairness, the media when Bernie was in front had a definite skew to "who can stop Bernie?!" Whereas now with Biden in front it's "can Biden pull through?" which are two very different messages about a front runner.
Since the start of this primary season, I've seen a serious bias against Bernie, pitching him rough headlines and seemingly holding him to a higher standard than the other candidates.
11
Framing race issues as class issues creates a coalition that would be impossible to defeat. Keeping race in a separate box divides that electorate and serves the interests of the elite.
7
@Point of Order MLK reduced race issues to class issues. King and the Other America.
4
The rich using propaganda to keep older people believing that the capitalistic system isn't broke?
Boomers have ruined the earth and ran up five or six generations of dept for the young people to overcome.
It wouldn't surprise me a bit if the took your Social security away when they gain power.
20
Gene - I am a boomer that lived through and supported the civil rights movement, awaited notification whether I would be drafted, went to college and worked nearly full time, paid my college debt and voted for Bill Clinton and more. What has your generation done. The problem you have is not taking responsibility for who and what you are.
14
@Brian
If you're bragging about supporting Bill Clinton, you are exactly the "boomer" he is addressing.
Many of us have been activists for ecology, peace, civil rights and economic justice though.
9
@Brian
“I don’t seem to realize that I inherited the largest economic boom in history. I was able to pay for college by working, something next to impossible to do today. I made good investments and my home has quadrupled in value. What do you mean you can’t afford one? Lazy millennial.”
5
Marshall McLuhan got it right more than a half century ago: "The medium is the message."
7
I voted for Warren. But even I feel that the media's rush to judgement on Sanders put a finger on the scale and is part of the story.
The Democratic party could have solidified behind Joe Biden and cleared the path for him without trashing Bernie Sanders. Sanders' campaign is staggering under the weight of its own internal contradictions, it didn't need the push.
It would've been better for all, to defuse the charge of socialism than try to derail Sanders, whose plans echo Democratic New Deal, Great Society, and ACA programs which are popular with voters.
The Democratic nominee will need every vote possible. Party solidarity and media support may work against voter determination and unity.
21
Bernie Sanders is desperately trying to embrace the media, especially social media.
I’m a baby boomer, so I thought I would ask my 2 daughters and sons in law, who are part of the Gen Y or Millenial group, their thoughts about Bernie Sanders.
They said he seems very angry and says the same thing over and over. Medicare for all, cancel student loan debt and break up the Googles and Facebooks.
Well, one works for Google - not getting that vote - 2 are partners in law firms and paid back large student loans - not getting those votes - the last works at a recruiting firm and is worried Bernie will slow down an already recession like economy. All 4 said his age and questionable health were also factors.
They said their friends echo similar sentiments.
Bottom line, 2 are voting for Biden and 2 for Trump.
Me, if Biden gets the nomination, he’ll get my vote; if Bernie gets the nod, I’ll be the first in line to vote for Trump.
Bernie’s done - his day in the sun ended on Super Tuesday - he will lose Michigan this week and that will place Biden in a comfortable lead.
Bernie’s always been a radical - we already have a radical in the White House - yes, a very different type of radical, but a radical nonetheless.
Even young people recognize the threat of someone who has such far reaching ideas could be dangerous to our Country’s founding principles.
No one wants to take that risk.
5
@Joseph Swartz Gee, one works for Google, 2 are law firm partners and one works at a recruiting firm. Seems we can safely assume your children are all well within the top 5%if not the top 1%. Of course they wouldn’t like Bernie! The question is why in the world the Democrats should try to appeal to people like them - and what happens to everyone else when the Democrats do, as they have for at least 30 years.
50
@Joseph Swartz, I don’t really think Bernie’s ideas are radical. He wants to make education and healthcare available to everyone. That seems like an excellent idea. I don’t see what founding principles that undermines. We use taxes to pay services that help society at large already, what’s the difference?
35
People who have it just don’t like to share. That was the problem. That created the problem and that IS the problem.
Everyone out for their own benefits. Why the United in America‘s name then?
13
To read the NYT over the past couple of months has been to digest an endless stream of reporting and opinion endorsing and feeding the narrative that Warren was knee-capped by sexists, fawning stories about how authentic Bernie is, and hit jobs on Bloomberg for spending his own money to rid us of an aspiring tyrant. The entire middle ground of the anti-Trump discourse has shifted toward Bernie thanks, in large part, to the media’s largely uncritical treatment of Bernie’s manic - and still largely imaginary - “movement” and its entirely uncritical coverage if his truly creepy and disturbing back story. If Bernie is unhinged about what he sees and reads now, it’s hard to imagine how he’ll react if and when the Trump sludge machine opens up on him as the nominee. This is all just more evidence that Bernie’s instincts are really not much different from Trump’s, just targeted toward different outcomes. And we’ve had more than enough of that nihilistic populism, thank you very much.
23
I could not find in this article a clear distinction between the corporate media and the non. The major point seems to be the sports style coverage of the mass media as opposed to what: the vying of leftist and rightist activist elites for media dominance? How is the new media non corporate, non elite, unfunded by billionaires, how is it unlike the London or New York Review of Books, the Atlantic Monthly, and so many other basically unread journals of substantive political information?
There is no question the media coverage of politics is too meager on substance and finds the personal contests between candidates has broader mass appeal to its polyglot readership. But how exactly are the new media going to appeal to a mass audience by creating a new one out of vague critiques and sporting stories of how the mass media is biased against there favorite candidate.
9
Great article. One of the biggest plagues of our times is the addiction to 24 hour cable news channels by older voters.
28
Sanders is absolutely right. If you want to know who controls the media source you're viewing, look at the advertisers. Seen any pharmaceutical ads on TV lately? Ever wonder why those same media outlets refuse to discuss the very serious link between mass shootings, suicides, and SSRI anti-depressants?
25
Public, non-profit media would be great for leftists like Bernie Sanders, but they would certainly not be less biased than the current corporate media.
We have huge public broadcasting institutions in Germany that are funded with billions of Euros collected via what is essentially a mandatory tax on every household in the country, whether you watch/read their 'news' or not. Everyone has to pay close to $20 per month to fund these public media outlets.
So what happens? Journalists everywhere overwhelmingly skew left-wing. So at these media outlets, leftist journalists can engage in leftist propaganda freely, unshackled by any need to turn a profit or even answer to demands of the public. And all citizens, including the millions who are totally opposed to their political agenda, are forced to pay them for this unwanted service.
Public media in practice always means that conservatives are forced to fund hostile propaganda.
2
@GS "Public media in practice always means that conservatives are forced to fund hostile propaganda."
Sort of the way liberals are forced to pay for a bloated military and endless wars.
@michaeltide True for Americans, yes. Not so much here, where the military is severely underfunded and couldn't even defend the country if it had to.
What I see in the media is that they are like cats with a laser pointer. They chase the bright red light, to the exclusion of all else around them.
Take Bernie and Joe out of the picture for a second.
It is little short of a miracle Amy Klobuchar did as well as she did since she was pretty much ignored. Even after the Times endorsed her, the coverage was minimal.
Tom Steyer never got a fair shake in this paper until today when, after the fact, they let him write an op-ed. Somehow, however, Bloomberg could do not wrong until he completely tanked at the debates. Even in the few critical op-eds from the likes of Charles Blow, the Times Picks comments were nearly all positive.
The insanely qualified Jay Inslee was ignored, as was the equally excellent Michael Bennett.
I'm okay with Biden. Not my first choice, but he will be much better than Trump. But we had a lot of better options. My fantasy of a Klobuchar/Inslee ticket did not come to pass, and I think I can lay a little of that blame at the feet of the press.
22
Let's be honest. How much money would MSNBC and CNN lose if there where no drugs and insurance commercial anymore? They are very unlikely to support any one advocating for idea like M4A because they would lose huge chunk of their revenue.
37
Great article and avoids the dismaying "balance" that is so often tilted against serious critiques of the existing media system. It's been tough to present viable alternatives that survive, but perhaps real news and thoughtful opinion are gaining. One need only look at the graveyard of progressive media to realize how much great journalism we've had and lost.
I first became aware of Sanders reading about him in the much-missed (by me, anyway) New York Guardian, a thoroughly Marxist-Leninist weekly that somehow avoided being captured as the political mouthpiece by any of the all-too-small parties of the US left. After surviving most of the Cold War, the economics of a weekly at odds with the rest of the press killed it off as Reagan somehow became a bridge to Moscow and friends to Gorbachov. Who needs such a paper when history is said to be ending? We now know better, but are worse off w/o the Guardian.
The 90s brought with it a media desert that set up what has occurred since. This included both LPFM radio and the Indymedia movement, which helped make Occupy possible in its many forms. Bernie started finding traction in those spaces and, knowing Bob McChesney, his efforts and those of others who ironically have emerged from the Midwest, are a sign that NYC-centric media are slipping in influence as millions seek the real story.
Save us from the stumblers who think Bernie is a lefty Trump, betraying their basic ignorance. That's not just wrong, but lazy journalism.
21
We are dying of despair. You really think Americans care about Party? That’s just residual brainwashing talking. It’s powerful stuff, but nothing can compare to facing death. Americans are rationing insulin. Hello? Sanders is merely risking his life to fight for basic cornerstones of civilization and life on earth. Any chance this is getting through?
35
"plenty of journalists who are class traitors".
amen.
and the ny times near the top of the list. i first became aware of this when we would read glowing stories of life in greece written during the repressive dictatorship of the colonels in the early 70s written by stephen r. roberts.
the air of panic created by bernie sanders victories in the columns of the nyt only underscores the cozy relationship of journalism to the values of corporate culture.
30
Simple math: Billionaires own media corporations. Billionaires don't want to be pay more in taxes. Billionaires don't like Bernie.
This isn't a surprise. This isn't anything new. This is why our country is in the trouble it is in.
And the people who don't think-- or know-- that our country is in trouble, are being told that by (drumroll) their chosen media.
Good times.
51
The uncensored, unobstructed free press died, when news delivery has become a business. It is that simple. Corporate interests require content that induces consumers to buy the product - in this case the newspaper, or watching a TV show.
Entertainment and education has become edutainment, actual news reporting has morphed into opinion pieces.
And the politicisation of topics has removed the last vestiges of truth telling.
Bias is king.
That is the sad fact.
9
The statement about those around the table being prosperous hits the nail on the head. The fact that the Times is pro-Biden is obvious and that anyone to the left honorary GOP-er Joe is suspect. Hey, don't worry, when Sanders is POTUS Joe will still have opportunities to vote to turn Social Security over to those trustworthy Wall Street stalwarts and for more wars in the Middle East (if MBNA gives him permission of course).
20
It would be interesting to have context for that closing remark by Mayor de Blasio. He's quoted as saying, "There are plenty of journalists who are class traitors."
When journalists are doing the work that everyone needs done, and that probably attracted them to careers in journalism, they're not being true to their class or true to their employers' class. They're being true to truth.
12
Pacifica is a disaster, it is nation wide, yet has almost no audience beyond Berkeley & Bklyn. The intercept, well funded, will go the way of El Jazeera, with its half truths and Bernie Bros. It is not that there isn't an anti-american left wing media, it's that the message is not palatable to the majority of Americans and esp. the working class.
3
@imamn Is the "working class" even aware of Pacifica? How about Democracy Now? How anti American is the working class?
2
Sanders would have more credibility had he not produced a highly misleading ad, taking Obama's comments on Bernie completely out of context. No one to blame there by himself!
14
Like it or not, Bernie’s reaction to his disappointment over his recent losses to Biden is increasing sounding like sour grapes. The young people did not come out and vote. The establishment forced Buttigieg and Klobuchar out. The corporate media. Maybe Bernie needs a bit of introspection as to what part of his losses he owns. Twice now, as an Independent, he tries to get nominated as the Democratic nominee. The US is basically a moderate country. Why is Bernie surprised that the Democratic Party voter prefer moderates to him? Geesh, Bernie, get over it. You’re the one who decided to run as a Democrat and not an Independent, so preserve your dignity and don’t lean in to the scorched earth campaign against Biden to salve your ego. It just gives sound bites and tweet fodder to Trump. Is that what you want your legacy to be?
15
@TMM "The US is basically a moderate country. "
That is is you're a moderate.. If you're a progressive, the US is a progressive country, and If you're a right winger, the US is a Christian country fighting for its life. Still, Bernie promised the greatest turnout in history. Where is it? Watching its phone? Looking for work? Making America great?
The proof of the polling is in the voting (with hand-counted paper ballots, please).
2
Bernie does not just have an issue with corporate media, he has a problem with media critical of him.
As an example the local, non-corporate newspaper Seven Days from his home state Vermont covered a story on how his wife Jane Sanders bankrupted a local college and got 200,000$ compensation for leaving.
From that point on he refuses to give them any interviews despite having done so for decades.
12
We once had a much better news delivery system. Then came the end of the Fairness Doctrine under Reagan, followed quickly by removing the wall between the news and entertainment functions of media outlets. Prior to that, it was expected that the news part of the organization would not make money, essentially being subsidized by the entertainment part. Sure, there was still media bias, but at least there was an attempt at neutrality that is missing today. Our media and economy has changed so radically in the interim that it's impossible to restore those systems, but it reminds us that we can still set the goal. Unfortunately, it's not the news outlets themselves that can set policies. This paper will have to follow the same stories that other news outlets report even if they know that the stories are not actually educating the electorate. A dinner that Hunter Biden had in Kyiv in 2004 in which nothing actually happened will get eyeballs, while another lie and Trump's buried tax returns will not. The solution lies with those people in government. As with Citizens United, the only people who can fix the system are the ones who benefit from the fact that it's broken.
45
I refuse to use Facebook, Twitter, or any other on-line service as a means to learning about or develop an opinion about any candidate. The nearest I get to on-line is the NYT and I take even that with a grain of salt verifying everything I read. Although part of the corporate media, the local news I watch reports on the local condition, the problems we face, and the local consequences resulting from local and national policy. In fact, I cannot remember when I last watched national news. No, I do not live in a bubble. I listen to my family and friends. I talk to people in shops and markets, in the street, at restaurants. Very few of them believe anything on-line or on the networks, often criticizing their tilted content and lack of civility. My son compares Internet content to a horde of protesters all shouting so loud that one conversation cannot be heard. I believe it's time to stop the shouting and start really talking honestly, no threats, no screaming about inequities without offering a viable options, and reasonable discussion of all the alternatives. We cannot survive as a nation built on fascism from every side. Vote for whom you want but consider the whole person and what he or she is likely to do to heal us.
16
@Angelsea There is excellent journalism on the Internet that is not found in corporate media. You do have to be selective. Look for reporting on the Greyzone (international affairs) or The Hill Rising (mentioned in ths article). Other Internet sources are pundits just as good as the panels on CNN or elsewhere. It's not all trash. But you might not agree with it. We have the right to disagree, don't we?
1
@AFR We shouldn't have to disagree about the news itself, if it presented honestly. Our disagreement comes with the way it's presented. Media bias, left or right (or middle) attracts like minded viewers and creates the sort of bubbles we have currently. I don't know if unbiased reporting is possible, but we could do a little better, because the lines between fact and opinion are beyond blurred now.
After reading this entire piece, I'm still left with a question the headline suggested it would answer: What Bernie Sanders Gets Right About the Media.
About the only thing I could filter out was that Bernie doesn't like "corporate" media. Well, even NPR and PBS are run by the "corporation" for public broadcasting. And as an avid consumer (and supporter) of those products, the coverage of Bernie has always reported the real problem with Bernie never being able to fulfill his dream of becoming president: He remains a socialist.
Last Tuesday Democrats across the country let him know how they felt about that.
And 99.9 percent of them were not "corporate elites."
17
I’m very happy to see this article from the New York Times! At 18 years old, I’m part of Gen Z. I subscribed to the NYT very recently to keep up with the news while traveling abroad. Although I’ve been very impressed with the coverage on the coronavirus, the political section leaves something to be desired. From the slant of the hard news pieces to the Opinions pieces mostly favoring Biden it’s been frustrating to see the same ideas over and over. Although this is the second self-aware piece on media coverage that I’ve read from the NYT in the past week or so, you need to step up, change your coverage, and diversify the opinions section. I don’t need to tell you that what you publish influences voters, but I’m not sure it’s leading us in the right direction.
86
@Madeline
Welcome to the world of republican NYT readers. The opinions are like a broken record. What you need to understand is that the subscriptions are tied heavily to producing this point of view. Readers rely on the NYT to get their opinions validated. That isn't just for FoxNews viewers.
9
@AACNY
That’s why my dad (who spends more time reading/listening to the news than anybody else I know) refuses to buy a subscription!
5
@Madeline
My husband complains his way through every day, and he's the least political person I know and also a voracious reader.
We are both decades' long readers. It's sad but the "Trump bump" is real. NYT subscriptions are healthy because of its anti-Trump focus. One thing I understand is the bottom line.
This is why the NYT struggles to open its readers minds. Sulzberger, Jr., is on record lamenting the lack of understanding of his readers of middle Americans, particularly Christians.
When the NYT dedicated its opinion pages to Trump supporters, the letters editor said it received a record negative response. NYT readers used to be the most enlightened and knowledgeable. Not any more.
5
I think there's merit to this article and I appreciate it. The media's reaction to Super Tuesday was as if it was reporting on the Second Coming. But to play devil's advocate here, and noting that the NYT's has increased its subscribership sizably in the wake of Trump's 2016 victory, is it fair also to acknowledge that a hugely disproportionate amount of coverage of his administration has been negative? That almost all the opinion pieces of him are critical? I admit that I've enjoyed this, and it's provided a good distraction in the midst of the nightmare. However, many on the right would say that this article is dead on for the treatment of their president and decry the "mainstream media" and it's treatment of those well right of center. Would the readers of the NYT's be as sympathetic to that critique?
13
@Andrew N
Safe to say they only notice it now because it's their candidate who is being treated this way. The constant anti-Trump pieces are still welcomed with open arms.
3
Ben Smith's theory is pure nonsense. The "corporate media" AND the Democratic establishment dismissed and ridiculed Joe Biden for 6 months and then left him for dead. The media narrative since last fall has been that Bernie is THE frontrunner destined to sweep Iowa, New Hampshire and Nevada, victories that would certainly propel him to victory at the convention. Ultimate corporate media insiders David Plouffe and Robert Gibbs pronounced Bernie the inevitable nominee even though Bernie has never been vetted in the slightest.
Even after Buttigieg got more delegates in Iowa and basically tied Bernie in NH the political reporting class never paused to rethink or set their assumptions or talking points. Contrary to the results, Bernie WOULD win and everybody in the Democratic electorate would happily get in line.
But this narrative was shattered when large numbers of ACTUAL Democratic voters got their chance to weigh in and officially pronounce Bernie a bust.
15
We actually do have non-corporate media already: it’s called PBS and NPR and it does incredible work. Am I supposed to believe that two populists on YouTube don’t have an incentive to make money and therefore are more objective or reliable than cable news? They may offer a different perspective which is good, but they’re chasing views and ad money in the same way that cable news is chasing ratings and ad money. Mr. Sanders is not always treated fairly in the media but he tries to blame his failure to connect with older voters entirely on that and other forces outside his control. Maybe his failure to articulate how he will pay for his programs also has something to do with it.
21
@Mbb -- look at the board of PBS or NPR and you'll soon see the source of their bias. David Koch was one member if I remember correctly. I distinctly remember listening to NPR one day in 2015 discussing how Sander's campaign wasn't really serious and how it was really just meant to pull Clinton to the left. From that day on I've come across so many heavily biased articles that I can rarely listen to them without my blood boiling.
14
NPR is destroyed to some extent after they started taking money from the Kochs.
13
Excellent article. While I understand the concerns with profit oriented "corporate-owned" or even "Privately-owned media, this fails to consider that there are many egalitarian owners who have a more democratic and pluralistic view of the world. They are not all Ruppert Murdochs.
4
2016 was the story of two unattractive candidates and one group of voters's determination. If the possibilities of a Trump presidency were not sufficient to unite Democratic voters then, will the actual abuses of his administration be so now?
Let's hope the story of Joe Biden's 'comeback' does not backfire, like the story of Hillary Clinton's 'inevitability'. In both, party solidarity was misrepresented and misread as voter support.
Clinton was widely disliked and deeply distrusted even among die hard Democrats and ran a delusional campaign - staying in her bi coastal comfort zones and building bridges to nowhere in Republican enclaves, while taking for granted a disgruntled base in blue wall and swing states. Media coverage of her inevitability gave many, who balked at voting for her, the excuse that she didn't need their votes.
Biden's candidacy was too big to ignore and too weak to prevail without massive propping up. Based more on the recent glow of being Barack Obama's veep, than on his own long record of off putting gaffes, dubious official actions, and downright noxious votes. The party cannot rewrite Biden's history. And he may be too old a dog to learn new tricks. But he darn sure better clean up his act, but fast. Biden is the front runner because other contenders dropped out of the race; if he keeps tripping over his own feet then we're all in trouble. The story is not the candidate's comeback, but the party's hail Mary.
20
@pi
And that is why Sanders is a much better candidate! Biden doesn't have it, and everyone know this. Trump will make mincemeat of him, if Biden doesn't self destruct. Should the media would give Bernie as much support as Biden got recently, it could all turn around. I thought Ben Smith's article was quite good.
13
We are dying of despair. You really think Americans care about Party? That’s just residual brainwashing talking. It’s powerful stuff, but nothing can compare to facing death. Americans are rationing insulin. Hello? Sanders is merely risking his life to fight for basic cornerstones of civilization and life on earth. Any chance this is getting through?
10
It's not only unsurprising but was completely my prediction when I started reading this essay, that the complaint against "elitism" would use women as its primary example. The point of overlap between left "outsiderism" and right "outsiderism" is exactly the hatred spawned by the fact that some women anywhere are doing well while any man anywhere yet isn't. It's a "populist" roar driven by loss of inherent male advantage, despite that loss being so minor as to be laughable still.
The media is problematic ? The main problem with media in this cycle was writing so many stories about how great Bernie was in quote challenging the status quota unquote and in being such a great defender of the people. Warren has *accomplished* much more than Bernie and has effectively the same political stance, with far better experience and efficacy. But the men both in media and in the political base just couldn't bring themselves to credit her, until she finally withdrew.
17
Warren is exposing herself as a fraud who only ran as a surrogate to take out Sanders.
5
@LF
One reads often of how *accomplished* Warren's Senatorial time is/was.
Yet they never offer anything except a now defunct CFPB that she helped set up as a citizen.
Short of her hearing aid bill, what else...?
2
Can we all please first return the channel to normal before once again, as in 2016, inciting friction within our own tent? Everyone realizes that Biden is a transitional but crucially, broadly-supported consensus antidote to the ongoing corruption of the American Experiment.
9
@Xanadu
Please refrain from using words like “everyone “. It may be needed to have a transitional candidate, but Biden? He seems to me the weakest. After older black Americans rallied around him due to let’s face it, Clyburn’s endorsement combined with name recognition, the DNC did as well. Hardly representative of “everyone “.
9
Whom do you think would better meet that criteria?
1
@Xanadu I would have been interested in the outcome if Clyburn had endorsed Steyer. We'll never know, but the party machinery does seem to be shifting into high gear.
Bernie Sanders has been searching for that alternative to for-profit EVERYTHING for a long time.
30
Excellent piece. I'd also add that there's a difference between measured media criticism and calling everything "fake news."
We obviously need to break up conglomerates. While the NYT is better than most corporate media, the depth of discussions and the stories covered are both much more interesting in publications like The Intercept for example.
The sensationalism of the corporate media is the worst.
27
There were dozens of questions during the Democratic debates about how we as a nation were going to pay for all the social programs that Sanders and Warren proposed but not one question about how we as a nation have paid or gone into debt over endless war. Bias? Absolutely.
192
@Seanchai
No one on stage was advocating for free endless wars though. Sanders has been running for 5 years. He needs to know how much his programs cost. That’s the media vetting and providing grade A journalism.
10
@Angel
RE: No one on stage was advocating for free endless wars
Irrevelant--and even if true, it's curious how we still end up getting them, along with more tax cuts for the wealthy, and increased austerity for everyone else.
I would be much happier to see the public's money spend in ways that truly benefit the nation--and this burden is much easier to shoulder in the long run as it will have real investment pay off--as it would be great if the United States could actually become and truly resembled a developed country in the 21st century rather than the overgrown oligarchic banana republic it is by which it has become, in Umair Haque's words, the world's first poor rich country.
Soc. Security tells us just more than half of all working Americans make $30K a year or less; 2/3rds of all bankruptcies involve medical debt (and with people fearful of going to the doctor); the Federal Reserve has noted that student loan debt is proving a drag on the economy, and we're producing climate effects that might the planet much less habitable for us. I don't see the freedom or liberty in any of this. What we really need to understand is how much THIS will cost.
Seanchai's point is very well taken and needs to be said more and more.
16
While late for this election cycle, the article is important and should have mentioned also the media criticisms of the Warren campaign which go in tandem, because they both threatened the rule of the plutocrats and corporate bodies. Until Citizens United is overturned, "Democracy" in America needs to have a big asterisk warning after its use. Important to note that new media such as "Politico" are equally tainted. When I signed up for their daily campaign update, I also received several times the corporate advertising message:
"A message from the Partnership for America's Health Care Future:
American patients can't afford the higher taxes, longer wait times and lower quality care that would come with Medicare for All. ...". Of course, after Super Tuesday, the healthcare stocks had a huge jump ....
68
Seems obvious that Sanders is getting all set to justify a third-party split-off from the Democrats. A few theories of how the Democratic party and the media have conspired against him, and off he goes to help re-elect Trump by taking his fervent admirers away.
The flaws in Sanders candidacy are monumental and obvious - yet invisible to his supporters. PBS provides no more and no less favourable coverage of Sanders than do the "corporate" cable news at CNN and MSNBC.
15
@Ben Sanders has vowed not to run third party. What in this article convinces you that he will?
26
Senator Sanders has said on record (check the most recent debates) that he will support whoever the Democratic nominee will be.
26
Sanders is right about the corporate media. They have given us war after war. Working people in America need a news outlet that truly represents their fight to survive in the onslaught of union-busting, billionaire-owned media distortions.
117
@Craig Lucas
Would you care to cite a single story in the NYT that has "given us war after war"?
The NYT reports on wars; I've yet to see one in 60 years of reading the NYT that it started.
6
This is a lot better introspective critique of the large media field than the Times article last week on how staff is "impartial." See it and my critique, https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/02/reader-center/political-impartiality.html#commentsContainer&permid=105564759:105564759.
Still, there are signs that even this new alternative to corporate media (which, as the article points out, may also be corporate), while adding new, needed voices, may be starting out with its own blind spots. How about not deciding ahead of time that elites and billionaires have to be awful and taken down. Instead, encourage these journalists, who are challenging others' assumptions, do the same with their own, as well as their colleagues across the desk.
Be open to nuance; aim for the full person being profiled, not just the persona; look for what everyone is missing about prominent people and issues; and, as the Times has been doing better lately, ideas from outside the mainstream that need to be heard (e.g. wilderness survival for those who think they need to be prepared, how teenage boys are trying to be sensitive, while struggling to understand what it still means to be a man, starting a meeting of journalists, ironically, with a poem).
The importance of recreating a healthy media is heavily linked to so many of the challenges of re-building our democracy and actually solving our many societal challenges, and bigger than whether Bernie is fairly covered or not.
But good job on the latter.
3
Wait? There’s somewhere between the poles? The poles of left and right? The poles of far left and center left called right?
The real question of Bernie and Trump is what happens when they are gone? What happens to the far left and the far right when their leaders leave? One thing we have realized is how identity politics, referred to as far left, is really more a banner for the elite center left to cloak itself in. The candidate who spoke most to that cohort, Elizabeth Warren, succeeded about as well as one might expect if you weren’t in the bubble.
But Bernie is over. Biden will win the nomination fairly and Trump will likely lose just the same. Where do Chapo go next? Who inherits Bernie’s fight? And Trumps? Or do the media get wise and realize clicks aren’t worth the trouble?
4
I can’t afford to give in to such despair and cynicism because I have a daughter who, although she’s been educated at Phillips Exeter Academy and an Ivy League School, as have all her friends, she has been working her heart out for Bernie because she can see the truth. She can also see that even if Jesus himself were running, the NYT would make sure he lost. The heartbreak of knowing that there is no way to counteract such power except by making calls to citizens one at a time to try to allow them to see through the brainwashing to admit things could be a little better is horrifying and demoralizing. We shouldn’t have to give up so much and fight so hard, and risk everything to tell the truth. I hope it’s not too late. Again. The next generation has been harder to brainwash because they aren’t glued to network narrative. The NYT has so much power to tell the truth. We shouldn’t have to beg for the truth.
2
On moonlit walks in all different parts of the country I have been struck by the observation that the common thread that weaves the country into a single fabric is best exemplified by the blue light emanating from behind the windows of dwellings both grand and simple. Advertising is at the root of it all, or one might say brainwashing.
20
@Thomas
People who watch cable news fast forward through those commercials.
1
@Elizabeth Subliminal messaging (and no, it's not illegal) has become more subtle and invasive than anything Vance Packard could have imagined. Messages can be embedded in music, not just flashed in 1/24th second frames. Don't believe everything you Think.
Sanders is right. Just look at what stories the corporate media does cover, almost nothing to do with the problems plaguing most Americans. Who sponsors almost every second of evening news advertising on the major networks? The pharmaceutical industry. Do you expect to see many stories about how they are ripping off the country? Now that Disney owns ABC, their local and national news shows have become shills, where a day doesn't go by where there isn't some promotion of a Disney property that suddenly qualifies as "news". There is no current equivalent to the major newspapers of old that vied with each other to expose corruption and injustice; they were called muckrakers for a reason.
I have no idea what they teach in journalism school these days, but from watching its practitioners on TV, it probably doesn't extend much beyond makeup and wardrobe.
116
@stan continople
A true voice in the wilderness. As always, thank you Stan Continople.
7
@stan continople ,
I am going to stick up for the Times on this one. I have many stories about big pharma, opioid crisis, flint, parkland, thunberg, public schools, big agro, metoo and just about everything else in the Times. I also came to know about Mr. Enjeti from his opinion pieces in NYT.
@stan continople
Ah yes, ABC, whose reporter said “hundreds” attended the Bernie rally in Chicago, when the actual number was 15,000+. That’s 15 Thousands.
They did also truthfully say in the same breath that thousands came to see Biden. That was 2,000. That’s 2 thousands. So, technically a plural of thousands.
15,000 > 2,000
but somehow 15,000 =100s
How is such obvious bias anything less than an outrage? I am devastated that it seems to be working, but buoyed enough to keep volunteering by Jesse Jackson’s instruction to Keep Hope Alive.
Not me. Us.
3
For one, simply reporting on the way each campaign is funded without specifically addressing the extreme sacrifice we who have nothing left have given in hopes of Sanders leading the way to making this country even a little less unconscionably brutal is not explained. It’s not an apples to apples situation, as reported. The millions that Sanders is being funded with, again, represents the desperation of hundreds of millions of Americans, a desperation that you still have no ability to conceptualize, as evidenced by your reporting. My friends across the globe are either incredulous or unable to take it in, that we are brainwashed into living under these extreme conditions. It may be too late to take responsibility for your actions. Setting the national narrative is almost impossible to counteract. It’s why Terry Prachett called it Narrativium, one of the strongest elements of the Ringworld Periodic Table. With every bone in my vulnerable body, I pray it’s not too late.
65
Excellent points.
2
The Fourth Estate's job is to check facts, policy initiatives, overall vet what is happening in the world of politics - not to be eager to share the same bed with the powerful. There are a handful of investigative reporters and news outlets that are worth the time of day: The Intercept, Democracy Now, Chris Hedges' reporting, Ryan Grim.
The media is to be critical, to dig deep, to uncover the uncomfortable truths. There is so little true investigative reporting in today's world. Without robust, inquisitive, reporting democracy will be no more.
74
@Amaratha
Ryan Grim is part of The Intercept and none of these sources are unbiased. They all have a left wing bias which means they have an agenda. True investigative reporters do not/should not have agendas.
2
@Amaratha When John Oliver has more of an investigative reporting impulse than CNN, that says something about the state of mainstream media.
2
So, what else is new? Corporate interests influences media coverage of candidates (and everything else). Fox News gave us Trump. NY Times and others also gave Trump lots of free coverage while nailing Clinton about the ridiculous “missing emails” Look where we are.
Many women resent Sanders for taking votes away from Clinton and now Warren. The media does not ever publish the reality that two intelligent, accomplished women had no chance against a screaming far leftist ideologue. I only agree with Bernie that PBS needs to be more fully supported by the government. It’s a wonderful resource (refreshingly without intrusive commercials).
19
@P R " It’s a wonderful resource (refreshingly without intrusive commercials)."
My local NPR station interrupts its programming two or three times an hour with a list of their "supporters," along with a ten second list of their products/services. Perhaps not commercials per se, but still pretty intrusive, especially when the came in the middle of an Adam Schiff argument during the impeachment trial.
You should understand that in this story is the essence of the keen mind of Bernie Sanders who has very smartly uncovered the truth that the Corporate media elected Trump with a Billion Dollars worth of free airtime. I long sought corroborating evidence, and Bernie did it when he very smartly demonstrated how Corporate Television dislikes him being averse to big money influence and how Television loves their actor Trump, their protector, because Television has been very bad in the past. I'm heartened to see justice in the future. I'm not a big Bernie fan, but he is smart and knows the inside story of Television and knows how Congress mandated a better picture to mesmerize viewers who were at one time angered by all the sex and violence programming portrayed. Remember the animated participants at the public FCC hearings in the eightees?
I could make make a knowledgeable mind staggering claim about Television, but I would likely be arrested by their feds and cops.
10
If one wants to look for the worst kind of bias in journalism towards the Bernie Sanders campaign, one need look no further than that vaunted outlet, The Washington Post. At times it appeared to me that there was a concerted effort by every opinion writer with that paper, with the possible exclusion of Paul Waldman, to do everything they could to destroy Sanders campaign. I started to wonder if the owner of the paper, Bezos, was pressuring everybody with the paper to write the most sordid things they could think of about Sanders.
Whether that was the case or not, after a while I could no longer countenance reading and supporting a paper which was capable of such biased journalism. Of course they are not alone, and there is little doubt that big moneyed interests are doing their best to make sure Sanders in not nominated. After all we cannot have a society where the ultra wealthy are forced to support a more equal society.
Now there is the strong possibility that those who dreamed of electing a man who would do his best to fight inequality in this regressive nation will once again be very disappointed. Once again we will probably get a so-called moderate Democrat who will certainly be better than the man in the Oval Office right now but will do little to upset the apple cart in bringing about badly needed change to this country. Once again, the moneyed interests will have won.
210
@Tom Krebsbach It isn't all up to Bernie. He realizes he needs a wave behind him. It may be starting with this election, whether he ultimately succeeds or not, but in any event it will go on for a long time.
19
Part of the problem with the media is demonstrated in this column. Namely the insistence that the race be conceded mid-contest. It’s simply unhelpful, unhealthy and unnecessary.
“And while some left-wing media outlets are now emerging, they’re not going to flower in time to save his campaign.”
We need reporting which focuses more on what IS happening and less on what WILL happen. The latter can’t really be called reporting at all.
140
@Doug This is so astute! The news has no business being in the prediction business. Please, just tell us what is happening, not what you think might possibly happen.
4
@Doug So true! The prognosticating is not only unhelpful, it's harmful. Self-fulfilling prophecy is a real phenomenon.
2
The media is very adept at using whoever they want for promotion. In 2016 and beyond the forgotten "Trump voter" was all the rage. The media, including the New York Times, ran countless stories on their importance. In the 2020 Democratic primary the media is promoting whichever group is expedient to their narrative. Sanders has many faults. Though, he is correct in calling the media out for bias. In recent days, MSNBC painted him as a greater threat than Trump or COVID-19. Regarding MSNBC, Chris Hayes is the only host worth watching.
14
This ties in to Paul Krugman's March 8 analysis of the new Thomas Piketty book.
Bernie is highlighting that media won't cover the left, only the right wing calling itself "center-left" that abandoned the interests of its base on the left.
Piketty makes that abandonment by the "center-left" the political reason for the current rise of right wing hyper-capitalism. He says that the people who abandoned their base in favor of "causes" more comfortable to them, that don't cost them, are in fact the problem.
Krugman won't see that aspect of it in his analysis. This article says that critique of "center right" media behavior "has more merit than we in the media like to admit."
They won't talk about it. They won't talk to or present those who do talk about it.
Instead, they act all puzzled and confused how it could be possible that their voters are in full rebellion. Well guys, it is like this, you messed up really badly, and they are angry at you, very angry.
68
@Mark Thomason
I agree. I too thought after reading Krugman's article on Piketty's book that he dodged the obvious recommendations for assuaging rampant inequality.
7
Here's a clue; If the mass media resents Sanders but loves and helped elect Trump, they must be an arm of Wall Street corporate culture. Way to go Bernie.
10
The article did a terrific job of energizing all the Sanders supporters. Unfortunately, my impression is any critical take on Sanders immediately brings out cries of media bias from those same supporters. Seems that Trump supporters tend to react in the same way to any criticism of their hero.
16
@Craig Freedman I’m a Sanders supporter and I think this is a relatively evenhanded and fair piece. I can say that most supporters don’t appreciate the facile Trump comparisons, though.
100
Senator Sanders has never gotten a fair shake from the 1%ers in media. He did not in 2016 and has not this time.
Remember these things as you watch MSDNC and the Clinton News Network: Every one of the hosts/spokesmodels are members of the 1% by income. Their values and reality are as ailen to Main Street America as the surface of Mars is to human life.
Next, look at the top advertisers on cable (and network) news. Big Pharma, Insurance and Energy companies. Do you think a candidate like Bernie Sanders might pose a threat to their current business model? The answer would be a resounding yes.
The whole Biden revival meme is nonsense. Nobody expected the “Souls to the Polls” crowd to line up to vote for Bernie and to be honest, not one of the old Confederate states will go Democratic in November. In states where a Democrat might actually win, like California, Biden won 5 counties. He lost all the important ones.
It would be nice to have a media that dealt with the facts honestly, but that is not what happens at MSDNC, the supposedly left wing channel full of Republicans but almost no Progressives. MS Maddow may have once worked at Air America, but her editorial choices these days look more like Morning Joe than Morning Sedition (one of her Air America shows).
When I see Jimmy Dore welcomed on MSDNC, I will revise my opinion.
315
Excuse me. I’m not clear. Who are the “souls to the polls” you are referring to? I live in Georgia, and I happen to be African American. I am also going to vote for Biden. I’m I one of the souls to the poll members who clearly, by your estimation, are not capable of making a selection other than Senator Sanders without the corporate MSM influencing me. And if I were bright enough, I would indeed vote for Sanders. And come Election Day in November, my vote won’t have any influence at all, because I live in the confederate south. Is there any chance you can begin to grasp why what you said is highly offensive. And wrong. And why the majority of Black voters see ultra liberals as the other side of the same coin as Trump conservatives?
37
No one wants to offend anyone. We are living in two worlds that were created by those who set the narrative, Gentle Reader. Those of us who have been seeing behind the veil of narrative set by the powerful and unwittingly or not coordinated press have been trying our hearts out to help bridge those two worlds.
21
No... can’t see it. Bernie’s personal historical actions around civil rights and equality and his policy positions to promote equality of opportunity are relevant to the black community. Biden is just the Democratic standard bearer with many questionable historical actions. My black son needs access to healthcare and his job does not supply insurance... many other sons of multiple colours are in the same boat. I’m 57 and will vote for Biden, but he will lose just the same.
11
Sanders and his backers' frustrations and resentment toward the mainstream media are right-on, and hopefully a harbinger of things to come. Cable news - and to a large extent, newspapers like The Times - are increasingly a conversation among the affluent about their interests.
From watching mainstream media, one wouldn't know that America is largely a downwardly mobile country these days; that upward mobility has practically halted in this country; and that our economic system is increasingly rigged toward capital and away from the public. And it's all told from an incredibly narrow point of view - having worked in the news business in the past, I'm aware that it's largely the cohort of the upper middle class (who all went to good schools, of course), and their interests color their coverage to an unsettling this degree. Their hostility toward Sanders is completely unsurprising - it's the unwashed proles, after all.
Social media may be a cesspool, but at least it's lifted the yoke of the MSM a tiny little bit. May it continue.
215
@Vin
We never hear about the most important privilege of all in America- class privilege. Never mentioned on air or in print in any significant way.
76
@David Gregory what does that even mean “class privilege”? Is that on a sliding scale? If someone makes $75,000 but lives in NYC are they the same as someone that makes $40,000 but lives in Alabama? If you are a descendent of a wealthy person but aren’t actually wealthy are you still considered “rich”? Seems like a vague notion designed to divide.
@Dudesworth
Class is not necessarily current income.
A person who grew up in a wealthy enclave with great schools and was plugged in to the elite crowd has a much different life than someone who grew up in a trailer park or the projects and went to a marginal school. Social skills, knowledge of folkways and norms, common points of reference and much more.
Then there is the whole networking thing. If Mom and Dad were well connected, you get doors opened that might not have been otherwise.
4
One night, maybe after Nevada, the CNN panel was dumbfounded as to why Bernie hadn't completely collapsed yet. All look bewildered and terrified that they had lost control of the narrative (they fixed that of course with $100m in free media for Biden after SC). They went to the Bernie supporter to ask why Bernie was doing well and she replied quite plainly and simply: "people are rationing their insulin." They had no idea how to react because none of them will likely ever be in that position and cannot fathom how Biden isn't good enough for the unwashed masses. It was emblematic of how completely detached they are from the way millions of people actually live in this country. Surely there's enough in the budget to travel to central PA and some hollowed out factory town in MI?
666
@Alex they aren't interested in learning what those people think, they're interested in shaping what those people think.
I was happy to see the profile of Brian Michelz, a Bernie supporting citizen from Wisconsin, in these pages this weekend.
More of that before it's too late to avoid a Biden electoral disaster. Not enough Southern, older conservative Democratic voters in swing States to help him overcome his NAFTA and Iraq War record alongside a steep declinine in his ability to speak coherently.
201
@Keith the people who laid out exactly why Trump would win (Michael Moore) the election or even get the nomination (Keith Ellison) were literally laughed at by the beltway. Now the people who've been wrong about everything somehow haven't really backed off making predictions again and are putting their heads in the sand over Biden's obvious vulnerabilities. The media, which has buried stories that would destroy any other candidate (fake Mandela arrest, etc.), will be the same media later on that will suddenly "discover" these stories for the general and hound Biden the entire time. They think it's just Fox News, but it'll be the same networks that they think are there friends -- MSNBC, CNN, etc. -- and it's going to be a big time reality check for them when they see Burisma turned into the scandal of the century.
144
@Alex
In the 2016 Democratic primary Bernie did extremely well here in the "Alabama" portion of Pennsylvania where Appalachia meets the Rust Bowl. His message is simple, clear and lets people know that Bernie sees them and their struggles.
62
Someday books will be written about the rampant bias in the media's coverage of 2020 Democratic primary. I've rarely seen such hysterical propaganda trucked by so many professional voices of reason, except maybe in the run-up to the Iraq War. I'm glad to see some acknowledgement of this problem in these pages, but the self-analysis needs to go further.
563
@Beulah Getting into alternative media/journalism really shines a light on how outrageous it is. Usually it's a little more subtle, to the point where the average person really doesn't catch it. This time around, however, they've done a horrible job trying to conceal their bias and deranged hatred for anyone not positioned in the center. Even my mom, who is a standard liberal who watches MSNBC every night and to my knowledge has never read Manufacturing Consent or listened to Citations Needed, sent me a text one night that said "man, they really hate Bernie on MSNBC!"
49
@Beulah I couldn't agree more. It's been positively shameful.
6
@Beulah
Awesome band. "A Good Man is Easy to Kill" might be my favorite.
Anyway, you're absolutely right. The pundits seriously panicked over a ghost they had created themselves. I think they should do some apologizing, some calling out of specific ways they've been underhanded, and show us how they plan to do better.
4
I always know whether an article is going to be positive of negative of Sen. Sanders by the photo that is displayed.
176
@NICHOLS COURT I've posted about the egergrigoisly obvious bias in the photojournalism here too. Glad others see it too.
16
@NICHOLS COURT
Spot on. One cannot imagine a picture of Biden or even Hillary Clinton appearing as if they are in the full throws of 'mad cow disease'.
2
This article is absolutely right. Since 2016 I have found the CNN and MSNBC pundits to be out of touch with both the left and the right populist movements. It was clear from the usual suspects on Anderson Cooper's pundit panel that none of them were very familiar with the youth, working, or middle class on either side. It often felt like a street person or kitchen help was listening in on the mansion's owners talking with their guests. In the last few months, I have enjoyed reading opinions from both the left and the right on The Hill, Young Turk and the Intercept. Diversity of opinions abound, and yet, one can discern the common threads revealing that this manufactured divide is more about the 99% vs the 1% corporate establishment in media, politics, entertainment and finance than the Left vs the Right. It is in the interest of the 1% to divide the masses and keep themselves in power. The 1% on both sides still fraternize in smoke-filled rooms. We would all be well served to intake news and opinions from multiple perspectives and voices, forming our own biases, instead of being fed biased information every night on main stream corporate media channels like CNN and MSNBC.
94
Journalists sadly do not make the final decisions on what is published or run on TV, the capitalist ownership does.
50
The welcome addition of Ben Smith and Elizabeth Bruenig to the Times's roster is giving a glimmer of hope for corporate media.
31
biden will get nothing done. he will stopped easier than obama was. sanders may be stopped too but he is the dark horse. he is the fighter. biden & obama gave up. obama (who i voted for twice) gave away a supreme court seat to republicans which is unforgivable.
Joe Biden’s Success Shows We Gave Obama a Free Pass
We refuse to talk about how President Obama’s failure to deliver transformational changes may have fed voter disaffection in 2016.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/05/opinion/Biden-Obama-2020.html?searchResultPosition=4
175
@Paul Schejtman
Thanks for the link.
From the article :
" By the end of Mr. Obama's first term, 95 percent of the financial gains of his economic recovery plan had gone to the richest one percent of the country"
Yet people still insist that Trump "stole" the 2016 election, and African Americans still favor Biden.
Crazy.
37
@Paul Schejtman
Obama’s failure on behalf of young progressives was a major impetus behind today’s leftist movements.
15
@Paul Schejtman
Obama delegated a Citibank executive to choose his first cabinet. While he was spouting his lofty rhetoric about "hope and change", he was already selling out. Now he spends his time cavorting with billionaires and buying properties on Martha's vineyard. He took us for chumps, and he was right.
22
Thank you.
Another point to add is the disgusting commercialization of our Presidential debates advertised as brawls so the news outlets can sell commercials. The worst part is the live audience that has obvious influence of viewer perception. Just watch a Canadian presidential debate and you will be sobered. The questions are about policy, they moderator decides who is speaking, and there is minimal included bias for viewers at home.
243
@Michael B. On the subject of debates, even though Bernie's campaign is upset the next debate will be seated at a table with questions from the audience (they feel it's a bone to the frail Biden who cannot hold up to rigorous, standing debate with sharp questions from moderators) I wonder if the potentially less pugilistic format might work to Bernie's benefit. "Maybe this guy isn't so radical after all. These ideas seem sensible enough"
Probably wishful thinking
10
@Michael B. There is no longer any meaningful function in our rapidly declining society that can't be reduced to a lowest common denominator money grab.
22
@Michael B.
I remember when they used to tell audiences to stay silent because it was such a privilege to be in attendance. When people would clap or boo, the moderators would usually make a statement to the audience shaming them. They used to ask actual questions rather than just having candidates respond to talking points from the other side.
That's how they want it, though, so we're stuck with it.
1
Good job. Maybe the Times can follow up in Michigan tomorrow on this story it broke more than a year ago: "Joe Biden’s Paid Speech Buoyed the G.O.P. in Midwest Battleground".
Here's Biden's idea of reaching across the aisle - filling his pockets with 200 grand to speak to Republicans while refusing to meet with a democratic challenger during a VERY close 2018 House race in one of the narrowest red districts (R 1) in Michigan (MI-06).
The Dem candidate whom Biden refused to meet with (Matt Longjohn) is an MD, with a goal to work on public health issues.
By campaigning for his opponent, Republican Congressman Upton, Biden shows he's got no loyalty even to his own former administration and its chief accomplishment.
By not reporting this story, the Times shows its bias against Sanders. If Bernie betrayed his constituency like this, it would be the leading story on every network and front page news in the Times - with cries for him to immediately end his campaign.
727
@Peter The Times is completely for moderates. Its annoying for all democrats not to get both sides of the story. Every writer is for Biden.
333
@Peter
Thank you so much for reminding us about this, Peter!
"Joe Biden’s Paid Speech Buoyed the G.O.P. in Midwest Battleground"
This should truly be dominating the news everywhere.
Biden is loathsome to his core.
284
@Hmmm Biden who proudly called himself "one of the most conservative Democrats in the Senate" in 1998.
There's such a slim chance he could inspire a great enough turnout to win.
138
Bernie is the third option between Republican Right Trump and Republican Lite Biden.
He appears to be the real deal for many Americans, in the way that FDR was for earlier generations. Giving hope to many of America's hopeless. That is a very strong asset.
If those in the media, up to and including the very bright Maddox, could PLEASE stop stepping upon the sentences of their guests after asking them a serious question, I would be very grateful and I would keep watching.
Why do they ask one a serious question only to rudely interupt them a few seconds later with some follow up? Have they no manners? Who raised these commentators?
When I do watch CNN from Canada, I find that many of them are lacking in deportment skills. Even Anderson Cooper, whom one would have thought that he was raised with better manners is no better.
I ask myself and just wondering if this is an American thing, where some need a lot of oxygen and feel a need to take up the whole room? I simply do not understand it. We have a few blowhard types on the CBC here from time to time as well, but apparently they receive the message that their behaviour is offputting to many viewers.
282
@On the Salish Sea When people in America discuss a rigged system, we don't just mean our government. We mean all of our large institutions, including our media. Our media is captured.
Understand that these pundits which you correctly perceive to be rude are merely doing their real job, a job for which they are paid handsomely. That job is to shut down threats to their parent company's bottom line. They are essentially journalistic security guards patrolling the informational kingdom.
Rachel Maddow is worth 20-million in large part with her tacit agreement not to cover Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Israel, or American poverty; but rather to spin Russia spy thrillers for a primarily Boomer audience that has health care and wants to be "infotained".
41
Spot on.
People ask questions without genuinely wanting to listen to the answers.
It’s an ignorant argumentative approach that’s just another means of bullying.
15
@On the Salish Sea So Bernie can't stand up to tough questioning? I saw the the interview and it was fair but firm - I didn't see any rudeness. This special pleading and victimology of Sanders supporters is part of why he is losing in the primaries. My views are very close to Sanders, but lack of pragmatic political skills he exhibits, and this sort of whining from his supporters, make me less likely to vote for him.
2
This is a good piece. If I’m nitpicking, I’d take issue with the assertion that Bernie’s struggles with older black people isn’t precisely due to the fact that cable news hates him and pounds the message that he’d lose to Trump. The polling shows otherwise but “we gotta protect these profits!!!” I guess.
127
@Darrell I concur. There's been such a furious barrage of anti-Sanders commentary and coverage on cable outlets - much of it unmoored from reality - as well as here at the NYT and at the Washington Post, I'm not surprised many older Americans are scared off from Sanders. It's working.
112
@Darrell Good point. And younger minorities support Sanders overwhelmingly, I think it is likely they watch traditional cable news less.
As a 30 year old myself, I used to watch them all, and then the internet opened my eyes to terrible bias of them.
I wish the author pointed out Democracy now.
87
@Kevin bingo. The corporate cable news is the ultimate GOTV arm of the corporate funded candidates. It's hard to beat that!
33
Amen
10
I loved this article. About time the NYT recognized more of us are seeking independent news.
320
@Chelsea
The rampant bias is why I dropped my NYT subscription and the WaPo when the prepaid year runs out. I am tired of being lied to and told who to vote for.
The spectrum of editorial runs from Center Right to Far Right, but never Centrist (that would be left of Hillary and Biden) or Progressive.
21
As a Millennial Times subscriber, I often feel this paper’s opinion section does not write with my generation in mind. It feels as if most opinion narratives come from the safe and careful worldview of affluent Baby Boomers and Gen X— and not the people like me who graduated into recession and believes a return to the status quo is a threat to our economic well being and survival. This was the first article I can say that has at least tried to look at why we as a generation are so distrustful of the opinion narrative of the 1% and WHO is filling that void. I hope the Times learns from this and diversifies its editorial board and considers perhaps inviting one of these new media figures to pen a regular op-Ed.
1016
@MK
Thank you. Same.
Watch Krystal Ball's show, Rising, on Hill.TV.
It is a revelation.
MSNBC should put her in Chris Matthews' spot.
68
@MK
Well; I am a 60+ individual and hardly any opinion piece represents me. I am retired- but gone back to work- too poor. You may have "graduated" into recession- but I have lived it several times. A pension cancelled and now sitting in the PBGC graveyard with tens of thousands of others- from bankrupt or reorganized companies. How would you like to "retire" on $152.95 per month after 40 years?
220
@MK Completely agree, Ive come close to cancelling a few times because I dont feel like I align with the inherent values of the paper- not a sentence I like uttering about any media especially one which serves as ostensibly the informer of objective world events.
66
Seems like it’s just a different version of corporate media - not sure how this is any purer than the rest. And ultimately, author admits that media got a lot of it right wrt Sanders.
6
I appreciate and am impressed by this article. Thank you.
26
Populist left and right, Sanders and Trump. Crystal Ball and Saagar Enjeti. There's a lot of overlap there, the commonality being an interest in the 90%.
23
I remember being taught in schools to look to books and primary source documents while doing research and not to look at Google or TV. It seems like only yesterday adults and seniors were teaching me the dangers of misinformation and skewed sources on the internet and media, yet it seems as though these are the very people who fall for it all so quickly. They are the most active on spreading falsehoods on Facebook. They are watching cable news at the highest rates. The irony is overwhelming.
Old people will continue to leave the youth with a huge mess to clean up—this time the largest in history with the threat of climate change—all out of fear, this time born from watching TV.
Seems we never learn anything from history.
I wish, just wish, the adults would do the right thing for youth. Should the youth be getting out and making their voices heard? Yes. Have they? Not as much as they should. But what's that phrase..."Be the bigger person."
50
@Kyle D
They HAVE been voting in higher numbers, compared to 2016, just not as much higher as the older age classes. Furthermore, the fraction of older age classes is higher than in 2016, also giving the ILLUSION that youth voter turnout is less this time.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1l5fpK7ysQhQbZPv9hnZ_-PO1J1zBVPXSSQjNejTXecY/edit#gid=1189109697
1
Breath of fresh air.
22
It is amazing how much the youtube algorithm has tilted towards the mainstream networks since 2016.
There was a company video leaked where the execs said they wouldn't let 2016 happen again and pro-Trump creators have been forces off or been demonetized.
For example, youtube superstar Tim Pool is reporting the videos that discuss Joe Biden's cognitive decline are instantly (algorithmically) demonetized so the creator won't make money if she talks about that.
Meanwhile, talking about Trump's cognitive decline is fine and financially rewarded.
I imagine most NYTimes readers support this policy but it pours gasoline on the fire for people already suspicious and shoves them further right.
6
Thank you for this article. It was right on the money.
10