Why does the media continue to ignore John Edwards?

[potone]

I was watching the situation room and everyone was speaking about Senator Clinton and Senator Obama as if the Democratic race had already narrowed down to them. Does this anger anyone else? It is not just Edwards that is the issue: the issue is that the public, not the news media, has the right to determine who the successful candidate will be. But I am tired of seeing Edwards sidelined by the media as if he were not a serious candidate. :grr:
Potone

[defendandprotect]

1. because he's the candidate they don't want --

[Catch22Dem]

2. DING DING DING!!! We have a winnahhhhh! (n/t)

[MonkeyFunk]

3. What's he done

to be newsworthy? Surging in the polls would be a good way to get some attention.

The notion that candidates don't get coverage because the MSM is "afraid" of them is laughable.

Candidates aren't "owed" news coverage - do something newsworthy, and the press will be there.

[LSK]

5. why should he do something newsworthy??? why cant the MSM discuss his issues

and proposals??? The campaign should not be about news stories but should be on the candidates PLANS.

[MonkeyFunk]

10. There are almost 20 people running for President

in the two major parties alone. They don't all deserve equal coverage.

The news doesn't owe them anything. The pundits don't owe them anything - get the numbers, and they'll discuss you, I promise.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

9. thee olde divide and conquer.

Obama (has/is/will) make mistakes, serious ones that the MSM will stomp on and blow up into hindenburg-styled bullshit. Yet, his real problem is Rezko in Chicago. Once that becomes known, he is dead meat. Unless he figures out a way to avoid it. If he does, he will be truly a master pol, and worthy of running a country.

Hillary cannot win. If she takes the nomination, she has 50% of democrats against her, 80% of moderates against her, and 99% of the GOP against her. She CANNOT WIN. I would hate for her to be the candidate, from personal and professional experience, as well.

Edwards is scary to the planners and plotters within the GOP.
And, so is the mayor of NY. he will REALLY scare the GOP, if and when they start to think about him seriously. Then again, hillary being much like most of the GOP, she should be scared too.

[saracat]

4. Thats because Gallup said he is the only Dem who can decisively win!

We couldn't nominate a winner could we?

[OrangeCountyDemocrat]

6. They WANT Hillary!!!

Then they can start BASHING her daily, and BASHING Bill Clinton again, Daily.

Edwards is not as easy to BASH, so they're really going all out to get Hillary the nomination.

Heck, even Murdoch wants her, so that should tell you something is fishy.

[senseandsensibility]

7. I think most of us know why

And I think it's the same reason they ignored Wes Clark last year.

[LiberalEsto]

8. He's the one they fear most

out of the ones currently running

[rucky]

11. Cry me a river...

<-----

[stillcool]

12. because perception = reality...

and it's the corp-whores job to provide their preferred version. If Edwards has a 'Dean-scream' moment it'll be all over the cable-'news'-stations 24/7...unless of course he is the chosen one.

[MonkeyFunk]

14. Exactly

if he does something newsworthy, like the Dean scream, they'll cover it. But he's not owed coverage every day just because of his positions.

[elocs]

13. I hadn't noticed, but as Buffalo Springfield sang, "paranoia runs deep"...

As an undecided let me say that I read and hear about everybody's pet candidate either getting picked on, ignored, trashed, or not getting enough attention and it's all some great plot by somebody to discredit the candidate. It's getting old already.

[Strelnikov_]

15. Because they want a cheap to cover/predefined/simple narrative

And in this case it is the Obama/Clinton horse race.

Going beyond that would require additional journalistic resources.

[Matsubara]

16. Probably because he is such an appealing candidate.

But despair not. The media didn't give Kerry that much attention but then he won the primaries (how and why are still beyond me, but...) so Edwards still has hope. Who knows what those crazy primary voters will do?

[Stop Cornyn]

17. Thanks for posting this.

[newyawker99]

18. Hi Stop Cornyn!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[Stop Cornyn]

20. Thanks.

[LostInAnomie]

19. The Clinton vs Obama angle is too easy for them to cover.

Reporters are by nature lazy. They like stories that come prepackaged. Obama vs Hillary provides a narrative of a charismatic up-and-comer against the Washington insider. Easy to cover, easy to comment on, no thinking involved.

Edwards, on the other hand, would require them actually having to do some research. He's not feuding with anyone, his positions are more complex than a sound bite will cover, he doesn't have a HUGE cross section of the country that will NOT vote for him.

It will be interesting to see how it will change if Edwards does well in Iowa. Although, from the coverage that the haircut and house got, I already know the angle they are going to cover him.