If you watched any appreciable coverage of both political conventions, that title alone probably made you spontaneously laugh out loud, gnash your teeth, or both.

But in case you did not, or in case you are unaware of just how enormous the disparity was, Rich Noyes, writing for – affiliated with the Media Research Center – has put together some of the specifics.

You can read the entire piece here, and I hope you do.

Meanwhile, here are just a few findings it uncovered:

-By a 12-to-1 margin, journalists spent far more time deriding the Republican convention for its negativity, even as their reactions to Democratic speakers were consistently positive and often enthusiastic. Cable news had its own unique biases: MSNBC carved out time on each night of the GOP convention for interviews with top Democratic officials, but — despite promises to the contrary — aired no such interviews with Republicans during the Democratic convention. Meanwhile, CNN devoted more than an hour of airtime during the Democratic convention to airing 18 party-produced videos, but only included three such videos during the GOP convention.

-During the Republican convention, CNN’s primetime (8pm to midnight, ET) coverage included just three RNC-produced videos totalling a bit more than 14 minutes of airtime: a non-partisan tribute to the Apollo 11 mission; a video narrated by Lynne Patton telling how she was helped by the Trump family; and the six-minute Thursday night biography of Donald Trump shown in advance of his acceptance speech. CNN skipped videos on important topics such as the Benghazi attack and the Obama administration’s Fast and Furious scandal, instead airing journalist panel discussions.

But during the Democratic convention, CNN chose to air 18 of the Democrats’ videos, six times more party videos than they aired during the GOP convention.

-During the first night of the Republican convention, CBS’s 10pm ET primetime coverage included a four-minute long segment of an interview of Hillary Clinton, during which Rose invited Clinton to bash her Republican opponent, asking if Donald Trump was “the most dangerous man ever to run for President of the United States?”

But during their primetime coverage of the Democratic convention, CBS included no interviews with Republicans so they could bash Hillary Clinton.

There is more.  A lot more.  Please use the link I’ve provided and read it all.

And when you do, please keep in mind the surprise some of these so-called “journalists” have expressed that Donald Trump apparently received a significant rise in the polls after the convention ended.

How could that be?  How could the people, having heard four days of virtual non-stop negative commentary about all things Republicans, react positively rather than negatively.

The answer – which is that a lot of people liked what they saw/heard at the convention – doesn’t seem to be within the parameters of conceptuality to these people.  They “know” how awful it was, so the idea that others don’t find it awful cannot compute.

But see what happens when you accuse one or another of them of being partisan….

1 Comment

  • How could that be? The simple answer to that in the minds of “journalists” is RACISM and uneducated people. They know better than you do. That is why they blatantly lie when they are supposed to be reporting the facts.
    See how simple that is.
    Simple minds produce simple results.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *