The mainstream media has been worshipping Hillary Clinton as the potential first female president ever since the day she became First Lady. The former Secretary of State seems almost immune to the trail of lies and scandals she has left behind her both before and throughout her presidential campaign. But when it comes to her biggest rival, the media tends to portray Bernie Sanders as a crazy old man.
Last Friday I wrote about a brutal article published in the Washington Post that attacks Bernie Sanders’s policies and refers to his campaign as “fiction-filled.” While I couldn’t help but agree with most of the story, I was surprised that the leftwing newspaper would launch such an attack against a “Democratic” candidate. The article brought to my attention not only the stark contrast between the media’s portrayal of the two Democratic frontrunners, but also the media’s tendency to favor Hillary Clinton.
Special AlertAre you a proud supporter of President Trump? If so, you'll LOVE this President Donald Trump Collectable Coin. This unique keepsake is a great way to honor the Presidency of the man devoted to "Make America Great Again!"
Conservative columnist Peggy Noonan wrote an opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal last year just as the 2016 campaigns began. In her story, entitled “Hillary’s Ungainly Glide,” Noonan reflects on the media’s treatment of Hillary Clinton:
“Republicans know—they see it every day—that Republican candidates get grilled, sometimes impertinently, and pressed, sometimes brusquely… Republicans see this, and then they see that Mrs. Clinton isn’t grilled, is never forced to submit to anyone’s morning-show impertinence, is never the object of the snotty question or the sharp demand for information. She gets the glide. She waves at the crowds and the press and glides by. No one pushes. No one shouts the rude question or rolls out the carefully scripted set of studio inquiries meant to make the candidate squirm. She is treated like the queen of England, who also isn’t subjected to impertinent questions as she glides into and out of venues. But she is the queen. We are not supposed to have queens.”
The Washington Post replied to Noonan’s piece with the claim that the media’s focus on stories that negatively affect Clinton (i.e. the suspicious foreign donations made to the Clinton Foundation and the homebrew server scandal) proves there is no bias. The Post also provided the weak argument that Clinton isn’t grilled by the media because she is so well known (unlike many of the Republican candidates).
Now let’s take a look at another example; the way the media treats the socialist candidate Bernie Sanders.
Sanders’s supporters were “hopping mad” last October after their comments about the presidential debate were deleted by CNN. “Already feeling the news network’s coverage had become rabidly pro-Hillary in the aftermath of last night’s debate, Facebook users leaving reactions on CNN’s page are now continually re-posting them knowing they will be quickly removed…with no explanation as to why,” reads a Media Equalizer story covering the topic.
The offended party cited CNN’s initial Facebook data showing Sanders as having won the debate. The network buried that information in the following day’s coverage.