What's Wrong with Edwards' Mini-Ads

I understand how you fell boxed out by the press/media. I watched a news cast were Fox had a reporter at B.O.'s campaign stop and at yours the only had a camera person. I DON'T want the media CHOOSING my vote. I CHOOSE you. Some may say I will waste my vote on Super Tues. if you bow out (your name is on the ballot) but I feel I still have the right to CHOOSE WITHOUT PRESSURE FROM GROUPS THAT WANT TO RUN OUR Country.

Factcheck article by Justin Bank is just a little bit half-truth. At the time the mini-ads were made, the most "recent" CNN poll did show that Edwards beat all Republicans. I think when you have a column called "Factcheck" you should be doing what it implies -- checking the facts. Mainstream media think they can shape this race - even "select" the next Democratic nominee by ignoring John Edwards. Please don't insult the intelligence of the American people. Remember, it is "We the People" who will make the selection, not you.

Factcheck article by Justin Bank is just a little bit half-truth. At the time the mini-ads were made, the most "recent" CNN poll did show that Edwards beat all Republicans. I think when you have a column called "Factcheck" you should be doing what it implies -- checking the facts. Mainstream media think they can shape this race - even "select" the next Democratic nominee by ignoring John Edwards. Please don't insult the intelligence of the American people. Remember, it is "We the People" who will make the selection, not you.

The mainstream media are a disgrace to this country for the way they have ignored, smeared, and misrepresented John Edwards' campaign, and pushed his competitors to the forefront without giving them the scrutiny they deserve. In this case, I find nothing wrong with Edwards' "Beat" ad, since it does not speak of the "most recent" poll but only of the "recent poll," which is perfectly honest and legitimate. The truth is that for the past year Edwards has consistently beat ALL Democratic contenders in head-to-head matchups with leading Republicans. Check thejedreport.com if you don't believe me. Fight_the_Hype is right (below); MLK III's endorsement is far more significant than nitpicking these ads. Newsweek is the one playing loose with the facts.

What a joke of all the things said and done in the Edwrads campaign the news media picks this to write an article about? How about the endorsement on Martin Luther King Jr. Day that Martin Luther King's son gave regarding Edwards' ongoing fight for the middle class? What about the fact that he woudl probably be a "bigger" contander if he would just sell out and take money from the same people that he vows to fight. I am personally outraged at the disregard that the American media has given John Edwards and I contirbute that to the gfact that the man has real integrity which would require major corporations to step up to the plate. I am personally starting a campaign to boycott the major media outlets and there sponsors I hope that anyone else who feels the same will join this fight. I will not be limited to two candidates.

The corporate media may be winning the battle against the Edwards campaign but they are going to lose the war. The American public is beginning to wake up to the Orwellian control of information resulting from media consolidation; the brownout against John Edwards (who, incidentally, has one of the highest favorability ratings among all presidential candidates) has been so blatant that it's become water-cooler conversation, and reason for ire. A significant chunk of the populace supports John, and our heels are dug in. We are loyal, we are vocal, and we are targeting the media next. I have been a subscriber to Newsweek for nearly 20 years, but no more. I've also stopped watching NBC News and everything on MSNBC except Olbermann (rarely). How sad that we who know John best and understand the good that he can do for this country have allowed you media-types to derail his campaign. And how very rich that after giving Obama a pass when, in the days before the Iowa caucuses, he touted himself as the most "electable" based on a single poll that excluded Edwards even then, you nitpick a 10-second ad that states what polls have shown consistently for a year: John Edwards is the most electable democrat, and the only one who can beat John McCain.

Oh, please. You are going to ding him because the polls aren't covering him any more? That alone is a crime. Yesterdays LA Times / Bloomberg poll included FOUR republicans (right on down to Guiliani, who can hardly beat Ron Paul at this point), and only TWO democrats. That is criminal! And now you are aggravating the crime. Listen up, arrogant media and pollsters: You are HIJACKING the electoral process and there will be lots of ANGRY americans if the wrong democratic candidate gets nominated and proceeds to lose in the November election. We already suspect you of being corporate-driven propaganda machines, and that election outcome will clinch it.

Are you kidding? Newsweek decided to go after Edwards on THIS? The article itself states that the CNN poll had come out only a month earlier, and that the 'most recent' came three days before the ads were put up--well after they were filmed. Moreover, the ads don't even say 'most recent,' they just say 'the recent.'

And Kucinich--I think Edwards can be forgiven for excluding him when the network debates have already done so.
There's no way either of these ads are any less accurate than what other candidates have put out. Newsweek should be ashamed of itself.

Are you kidding? Newsweek decided to go after Edwards on THIS? The article itself states that the CNN poll had come out only a month earlier, and that the 'most recent' came three days before the ads were put up--well after they were filmed. Moreover, the ads don't even say 'most recent,' they just say 'the recent.'

And Kucinich--I think Edwards can be forgiven for excluding him when the network debates have already done so.
There's no way either of these ads are any less accurate than what other candidates have put out. Newsweek should be ashamed of itself.

John Edwards may sound like a broken record about understanding the plight of the average American, and hearalding from South Carolina, but at least he's staying true to his message and himself. He's not slinging mud unneccessarily. I really hadn't heard much about his solutions, so I went to his website www.johnedwards.com and learned alot. If I was a democrat he would have my vote.

There four hundred plus member sent to washington on behalf of the American people, and it hasn't happen to date. They are all self serve, centered and the truth is no where to be found. Clinton and Obama have craweled into the mud pit and I for one hope they sink. Lie to me if you will but look me in the eye and do it. I for one have tuned them out. John stay Positive and others will see you as I do and will get my VOTE.

I have seen the Edwards spot to which you refer above and he says "a recent CNN poll." By your own admission that is true! He does not say "the MOST" recent poll, he says "A" recent poll. YOU are the ones distorting the facts, not John Edwards.

I hae seen the Edwards spot to which you refer aboce and he says "a recent CNN poll." By your own admission that is true! He doesn't say the MOST recent poll, he says A recent poll. YOU are the one distorting the facts!

Here's a story: What's Wrong with Newsweek's Mini-Journalism:

Newsweek, along with most of the other corporate-owned media outlets, clearly has a bias towards Clinton and Obama. By continuing to ignore the fact that John Edwards is still in the race, mainstream media/corporate America is manipulating the vote.

Edwards is being deliberately shut out. As Mr. Bank, in this article, points out while attacking Edwards on a minor flaw, "Edwards wasn't even included in the most recent CNN poll...."

Clinton and Obama are in the news every day. Edwards has been mostly ignored. For those who say that he is too far behind Clinton and Obama, others of us say that he is behind because he's not been getting a fraction of the press that Clinton and Obama have had.

Some of us might also say that we believe it is, in most cases, a deliberate attempt to shut out Edwards because he would be the most formidable opponent for any Republican nominee, and the corporate-owned are afraid that Edwards would win.

It's unethical, and it's not what real journalists do.

I'm disgusted with the way the media attacks John Edwards on minor points while they give Hillary and Obama a free pass. I don't mind them criticizing Edwards, but they certainly don't show the same sort of journalistic hardball to the two beauty candidates. It's bad enough that they don't cover how Edwards won the crowds over in the last two debates and they treat Edwards as if he doesn't exist -- giving the nation a distorted impression of his viability as a candidate; but to let the other two play according to a whole different standard is just too much. And to think I used to like this network, too.

look at the number of votes in Nevada, my little town has more than what was cast in the whole state. the system needs changed and take away all the money, let them fight for every state over a 3 month period, its the same message over and over anyway.

Obama and Hillary say what you want to hear, but John Edwards sounds like he really does care.

Fact check!!! Read the other comments below to see how ironic this name is. The public are disgusted with the way the media selects which facts and which parts of which facts will be presented. Shame on you for misrepresenting the facts. John Edwards speaks the truth.

John Edwards is the most truth telling and courageous person in the race. Why does the spinless media and pundits are so fearful of an honest man? Obama or Hillary will not win. They are LOSERS, just like John Kerry.