ONTD Political

Cindy McCain: Media had 'agenda'

7:12 pm - 01/19/2009
By ANDY BARR | 1/19/09 3:39 PM EST

Cindy McCain attacked media coverage of her husband’s presidential campaign Monday, saying there is now “very little difference now between journalism and gossip.”

“Without sounding bitter—and I’m not bitter—I do believe there was a media bias. I do believe that the media had a specific agenda and with that said, the American people cast their vote,” McCain said in an interview she gave to her daughter Meghan, a blogger who posted the transcript on The Daily Beast.

“I truly feel that unless the media goes back to unbiased reporting they are going to do a disservice to the youth of this country. The future of this country lies in the youth and we have to be good stewards of information and truth,” she added. “There is so much more to it than just one article and people telling lies, it affects much more than that.”

McCain was particularly critical of a New York Times profile of her that ran shortly before the election.

“It is interesting that it got to the point where the New York Times profile of me is being used as an example of the bias in reporting in journalism classes,” she said. “I had never spoken with the reporter who wrote the article. She contacted the kids that went to high school with my youngest daughter over the Internet, and as a parent, that was scary.”

Source

The full interview can be found on this site.Last question:
You’re about to leave for D.C. for the inauguration. Does it feel bittersweet?
Yes, it's bittersweet. I was talking to your dad today, both of us are supportive of the administration because we believe in this country. We want President-elect Obama to succeed because it's what is best for the country. But for me it is a very bittersweet moment and I believe your father would have made a good president. For me it will be a hard moment, but I am proud to be there."
schmiss 20th-Jan-2009 12:48 am (UTC)
You know, normally I have zero sympathy for political wives who parrot their husbands' lies (ahem Laura Bush), but I can't help but kinda respect Cindy for two things --

1. the fact that she's the IRL Betty Draper plus a couple decades

2. At a private gathering in Aspen, Colo., in the summer of 2007, a friend asked Cindy whether she would stab Rove in the back if he walked by. "No," she answered, "I'd stab him in the front."

So I'll forgive you this one, Cindy. But watch it.
randomneses 20th-Jan-2009 01:09 am (UTC)
That...is sorta awesome.
homasse 20th-Jan-2009 01:22 am (UTC)
OK, #2 there is badass.
germli 20th-Jan-2009 01:34 am (UTC)
I don't hold much of an opinion on Cindy but I always go whaaat when I think of her saying:

a. That bit about her son and Obama not funding the troops.
b. Obama ran the dirtiest campaign in American History. Seriously after 2000 with Bush/Rove you think Obama was worse?
koalafrog 20th-Jan-2009 01:45 am (UTC)
I love how people (especially republicans) magically forget Watergate when it comes to deciding the "dirtiest" campaign in US history. idk, kind of hard to top breaking into the offices of your opponents.
germli 20th-Jan-2009 01:54 am (UTC)
Especially when it wasn't that long ago.

Still I think it's a bit funny when politicians think the media gets too personal as if it's brand new information. Andrew Jackson could let them know.
noheadlines 20th-Jan-2009 02:58 am (UTC)
The funniest thing about Watergate was that McGovern never had a chance at winning! The polls weren't even close enough for ratfucking etc to make a difference.
pinksta_r 20th-Jan-2009 03:03 am (UTC)
This is exactly what I was about to say. Cindy McCain lost what little respect I might have had for her with that troop funding nonsense.
automat 20th-Jan-2009 03:41 am (UTC)
oh shit that second one is awesome!
gretchystretchy 20th-Jan-2009 12:53 am (UTC)
There's nothing like prefacing a comment with "I'm not bitter" to reveal just how bitter you really are.
kleinerbar 20th-Jan-2009 12:57 am (UTC)
"no offense, but..." sets a similar tone
koalafrog 20th-Jan-2009 01:46 am (UTC)
I'm not racist, but...
jigglemypuff 20th-Jan-2009 12:54 am (UTC)
These people need to stop blaming the media for all their failures.
urban_stoop Somewhat OT, but...20th-Jan-2009 01:04 am (UTC)
I was thinking about this today- is there an argument to be made that the media, in fact, *had* a bias in Obama's favor and had a point? I was a hardcore Hillarygirl back in the primaries and sent out all these ranty emails about OMG TEH MSNBC NEEDS TO DIE, but, in retrospect, I'm big enough to admit that Hillary would never have affected this kind of mood in the country, and probably not won like this, and whoever decided back in October '07 that Obama was going to be president (granting the premise that that's what happened, and I'm not saying it necessarily was, but all the positive attention Obama got *did* help) they were pretty right?

I just thought about this in political theory class today (talking about the Federalist Papers) and thought I'd throw it out there, see if anyone wants to play.
schmiss Re: Somewhat OT, but...20th-Jan-2009 01:15 am (UTC)
Study: Coverage of Clinton, Obama ‘Almost Identical’
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6565086.html
http://journalism.org/node/11266

Obama's ex-pastor dominated primary coverage
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/06/06/obamas_ex_pastor_dominated_primary_coverage/?page=full

The idea that Obama was given a free ride for the media, when he was pressed on all sorts of ridiculous questions about his church and his patriotism and outright asked if he believed in the American flag is pretty ridiculous.
bellichka Re: Somewhat OT, but...20th-Jan-2009 01:32 am (UTC)
ITA.
chibi_melo Re: Somewhat OT, but...20th-Jan-2009 01:41 am (UTC)
This.
germli Re: Somewhat OT, but...20th-Jan-2009 01:28 am (UTC)
Being a Hillarygirl back in the primaries I see the point you're making. Obama did benefit from his rock star status (who wouldn't?) but the coverage on him was not 100% positive. The media was ALL OVER the Jeremiah Wright situation, for example.

Obama did not have the campaign in the bag when he first announced his run. Once the Clinton campaign started making mistakes, they left the door open for him. And with McCain...after the Palin pick and McCain's bit about the economy being sound, all Obama/Biden had to do was appear calm and level headed. Not really but I hope you get what I'm saying.

Idk.
bestdaywelived Re: Somewhat OT, but...20th-Jan-2009 04:02 am (UTC)
Even then, it wasn't really McCain that was under scrutiny. Sarah Palin took the brunt of it.
evilgmbethy Re: Somewhat OT, but...20th-Jan-2009 10:49 am (UTC)
McCain could have had such a breeze of this campaign. He *had* a media that adored him.

Palin didn't help. But what also didn't help was all the whining from the campaign about the media. Whether or not you think they're biased, whining about them and telling them how much they suck? Not the way to get them on your side if you want them on your side.
koalafrog 20th-Jan-2009 01:23 am (UTC)
I'm sure all these media blamers also "blamed" the media for helping W win twice, right?






Right?
train_diskense 20th-Jan-2009 04:26 am (UTC)
...Once.
box_in_the_box 20th-Jan-2009 01:25 am (UTC)
On the one hand, OMG MEDIA BIAS automatically inspires a CRY MOAR reaction from me.

On the other, this?

Yes, it's bittersweet. I was talking to your dad today, both of us are supportive of the administration because we believe in this country. We want President-elect Obama to succeed because it's what is best for the country. But for me it is a very bittersweet moment and I believe your father would have made a good president. For me it will be a hard moment, but I am proud to be there.

This is a pretty understndable reaction, and under the same circumstances, it's probably a lot more classy that I would have managed to be.
saramiskismet 20th-Jan-2009 01:48 am (UTC)
Everyone talks about the liberal media as if Fox News doesn't count.


Oh. Wait.
bluetooth16 20th-Jan-2009 01:58 am (UTC)
Fox News doesn't count because it actively fights Liberal Bias.
celtic_thistle 20th-Jan-2009 02:36 am (UTC)
By having a right-wing bias and pretending to be "balanced?"
bluetooth16 20th-Jan-2009 03:05 am (UTC)
Exactly so. I just wish everyone else was like Fox and admitted their biases, whether outright liberal or rigged centrism.
tsunamiwave7 20th-Jan-2009 03:43 am (UTC)
Wait, FOX admits their biases? Is this the same channel that has "Fair and Balanced" plastered over every show?
bestdaywelived 20th-Jan-2009 04:00 am (UTC)
ikr
hinoema 20th-Jan-2009 05:42 am (UTC)
When you capitalize it like that, don't forget the little 'TM' symbol.
schmiss 20th-Jan-2009 01:59 am (UTC)
It's funny, MSNBC tends to beat its ratings during Countdown & Maddow and occasionally with Hardball, but overall Fox is still the biggest network. Dunno how the Republicans can claim bias and still gloat over how much it's squishing the competition.
sunoftheskye 20th-Jan-2009 08:00 am (UTC)
And it's also the highest rated.
germli 20th-Jan-2009 07:14 pm (UTC)
Nope. Third.

Fox News racked up its seventh straight year as the most-watched cable news channel, delivering an average prime-time viewership of 2.1 million, 40% more than 2007, according to data released Tuesday by Nielsen Media Research. CNN placed second with 1.3 million, up 69%, while MNSBC drew 920,000, a boost of 82%.

Source
eyetosky 20th-Jan-2009 02:28 am (UTC)
"Without sounding bitter—and I’m not bitter"

To paraphrase Olde Bill, methinks the lady doth protest like whoa.
celtic_thistle 20th-Jan-2009 02:30 am (UTC)
Oh god. The LIBRUL BIAS thing is so old meme.
love_ology 20th-Jan-2009 02:36 am (UTC)
She seems like a decent lady (I can't say I've read much about her, so I can't really judge) and this is very classy: "We want President-elect Obama to succeed because it's what is best for the country". I think it would be awesome if everyone thought like that.

I mean, even though I was bitter that Bush lost, I still wanted what was best for the country. I can't help but think that there are few people that hope Obama does poorly just for the "I told you so" factor...which is counter-productive imo. :/
germli 20th-Jan-2009 02:40 am (UTC)
I can't help but think that there are few people that hope
Just a few? Wish that were the case.
warmsound 20th-Jan-2009 02:36 am (UTC)
Hey Cindy, while we're on the subject of agendas, why don't we talk about the agenda your husband's campaign had to not merely discredit Obama politically, but to take advantage of the racism and xenophobia that still sits pretty deep in a significant portion of this country's population by continually implying in numerous ways that he was a terrorist sympathizer, that he had personal ties to terrorists, that he was anti-American, etc? Because, y'know, I'm so sure that it neeeeever crossed their minds that people might merge those implications with the rumors about him being a ~*sekrit muslin*~ and such.

I mean, without sounding bitter.
sopostmodernist 20th-Jan-2009 04:36 am (UTC)
although to be fair -- and you're right, the McCain campaign did engage in those attacks -- it was a ~PALIN-GONE-WILD~ that really went overboard with the Ayers, sekrit muslin, "pro-america" gibberish, as opposed to McCain's top people who said she went off script. McCain's actual attack ads were just as bad/mediocre though, remember the Britney/Paris Hilton one?
azure_rhymes 20th-Jan-2009 02:40 am (UTC)
The media has a liberal bias because life has a liberal bias, jfc.
sofieverus 20th-Jan-2009 09:29 am (UTC)
and we all know that reality has a liberal bias, too
leitao 20th-Jan-2009 03:19 am (UTC)
Didn't Shepard Smith rant about this on Fox a while ago? (He was pretty badass about it, too.) I don't think it's a "bias" so much as it is just reflecting the general mood in the country; people were and are energized by Barack Obama, and, especially toward the end of the campaigns, were tired of McCain's Roveian low-blows (which echoed the ugliness of the politics of the past eight years). Also, Obama was a lot stronger on economic issues (McCain was all over the place on that one), so that was a definite boost in his favor with the public, and justly so. Don't blame the media for reflecting this mood -- blame your uninspiring, lame-duck campaign.

I mean, I mostly watch CNN and didn't especially note any Obama gushing from them during the campaign. They're all annoyingly bland, and only Jack Cafferty seems to blurt out what the hell he's really thinking; and even then he's not on that often, haha.

But in any case, if she's insinuating (as so many do) that the Liberal Biased Media (TM) helped Obama win the election, how do you explain Bush? Twice? XD
angry_chick 20th-Jan-2009 03:39 am (UTC)
Sure it had an agenda, you fucking cyborg.
bestdaywelived 20th-Jan-2009 03:58 am (UTC)
In other words .... WWWWWWWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHH I WANTED TO BE QUEEN OF THE WHITE HOUSE
abiding 20th-Jan-2009 04:16 am (UTC)
In b4 neoconservative tears macro. :']
ladyanneboleyn 20th-Jan-2009 06:47 am (UTC)
Aww, bb. ILU, Cindy.
sunoftheskye 20th-Jan-2009 08:01 am (UTC)
And why exactly didn't the public listen to the liberal media bias back in 2004?
This page was loaded May 19th 2013, 4:58 am GMT.