How can American's make an informed decision about the Presidential Race when networks filter their messages?

Question

Considering how important the race this year has been, how many hundreds of thousands of hours of press it has received, and how America is literally divided on what to do about the next Presidential Race and this year, American feeling more than ever how important it is to choose wisely, and how much we've been hearing about the DNC and GOP conventions.  That people who are tuning in aren't getting to hear the main speakers, instead, just being force to hear side news and commentators opinions, than later being told, the night was uninformative and weak. 

1) Why is this important event we've been waiting all year for being filtered so much?

2) Since it is, how can the broad spectrum of Americans be expected to really learn what the two parties are saying and make a better decision who is better of the TWO?

3) Does anyone believe the same will happen with the next convention?
 
Before answering, please consider today's AP article on this (thanks)...

excerpt...
...When House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was addressing the convention Monday, drawing a contrast between Obama and Republican Sen. John McCain of Arizona, Fox News Channel's Bill O'Reilly was in a booth far above the delegates interviewing a pollster. O'Reilly waved in the direction of Pelosi on stage with a dismissive hand.

"Now we have Nancy Pelosi bloviating, and I say that in an affectionate way, behind us," O'Reilly said. "It doesn't seem like the crowd is on the edge of their seats."

Fox's viewers weren't allowed to judge for themselves. Same thing for CNN at the time, where Wolf Blitzer was holding court as Pelosi talked. Among the cable news networks, only MSNBC gave Pelosi's speech any real attention.

Three hours later, as CNN analysts were wrapping up the night, several talked about the absence of "red meat" attacks on the Republicans. But Democratic activist Hillary Rosen noted that Pelosi was doing some of that — only CNN wasn't really listening...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080826/ap_on_el_pr/cvn_tv_s_filter

aceking52 · Accepted Answer

Filter ? The candidates speak quite often in speeches and debate . They speak in there own words (kinda) and own ideas. More than enough 
to make an informed decision if you are a person of principal and fundamental beliefs .

(I think you should have posted this in politics)

Nature of the media . Like I said , there is plenty of opportunity to here them in their own words.

Anonymous · Answer

I don't have a TV.  I read the newspapers to avoid the screaming, scheming commentators, then I go on-line to the BBC and other foreign news sites.  The sites for businessmen like Asia On line and the Far Eastern Economic Review are best because businessmen need information that is accurate in order to make decisions.  They don't need the spin.  then I read between the lines, and make my own synthesis from what I know about history and politics.  That is how I do it.  Now most of my friends just buy the crap or go with their gut feeling or they call me and ask about Georgia, the Russians and So Ossetia.

Scribepalladin · Answer

Personally, i watch MSNBC because I like the commentators and the commentary itself is less intrusive.

The problem is not that we don't get to hear the candidates. Pastor Rick Warren devised a great forum for the public to see the candidates in action. 

The problem is that, when candidates say something substantial, pundits focus on trivialities like wearing a flag lapel pin and who would make the more agreeable First Lady.

A better srervice would be debunking spurious claims in attack ads.

generationZ · Answer

since congress allowed coprporations to tak eover our nation it's all a waste of time, we are doomed!! read Kucinich's speech tonight from dem convention...very eye opening

Trending News

How can American's make an informed decision about the Presidential Race when networks filter their messages?

4 Answers