I get kind of sick of hearing people saying that the media is biased this way or that, when many times it seems that they are only really upset that the media simply isn’t reporting things exactly according to that person’s view point. That said, I am certainly critical of the media as well, though I don’t often voice it.
One thing I did find quite surprising was that, at least according to one paper I read, Ron Paul, while in forth place, was a head of Rudy Giuliani in the bid for the Republican presidential nomination. I find this to be concerning because I haven’t heard Paul mentioned at all by the media, while Giuliani has been mentioned just as much as the other candidates. The press would likely argue that Giuliani is more of a known public figure as compared to Paul, and that Paul is in fourth and therefore not likely to win. There is some truth to these, however one must wonder if it has something to do with Paul’s being essentially Libertarian in his political views. I does seem traditional for the media to shun anyone outside of the primary two political parties. I feel that this is a pretty obvious example that the media may not be giving us a good picture of what is actually going on.
In fairness, I should note that CNN.com has listed all of the candidates. From there, it shows that Paul came in second in the Nevada caucuses, third in Maine, has received 10% to 20%+ of the votes in a half dozen states (standings haven’t been determined in all these states yet), and he has six pledged delegates. While this is far behind the front runners, it is none the less more than zero, and seems worthy of at least occasional brief mention, rather than the silence he seems to receive. Perhaps I’m just unaware though—I don’t see or hear all of the news.