Edwards is taking aim at the media for acting as if there are only two Democratic candidates running. (Photo Credit: Getty Images.)
WASHINGTON (CNN) - John Edwards' campaign is launching a full-on assault on the media for what they claim is inadequate and unfair press coverage of the former North Carolina senator's presidential bid.
"For the better part of a year the media has focused on two celebrity candidates,” Edwards Communications Director Chris Kofinis said Thursday. “And they continue to act as if there were only two candidates in the race, even after John Edwards beat Senator Clinton in Iowa and poll after poll show competitive races in Nevada, South Carolina and other key states."
On Thursday, the campaign went live with a Web site that sites several recent news headlines that only include Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. It also includes recent statistics from the Project for Excellence in Journalism that indicate that from January 6-11, Edwards received just a fraction of the news coverage allotted to his two rivals.
The campaign has even produced a Web video, "What about John Edwards?", that scrolls through several clips of media pundits discussing only Clinton and Obama, and ends with the results of a focus group that suggested Edwards won the most recent debate in Las Vegas.
And on Wednesday, Edwards' spokesman Eric Schultz sent out an e-mail that suggested the senator's low poll numbers nationally are directly linked to his limited media coverage.
The candidate himself has brought up the issue repeatedly on the trail of late, and on Thursday one town-hall supporter urged the crowd to directly complain to media outlets about the lack of coverage. Edwards said he agreed, and that it was time to speak out.
– CNN Ticker Producer Alexander Mooney
Could CNN please do a little more coverage of Obama? There was a little space devoted to other candidates. I am sure this was an oversight. Also, for 12 hours today, on CNN TV his name was mentioned more times than I could count. Why do the CNN execs simply turn the web and network over to him – save some of us some trying to get a balanced coverage.
I AGREE THAT SEN. EDWARDS GETS LITTLE COVERAGE, BUT THEN AGAIN HE IS SO FAR BEHIND IN THE POLLS IM SURE THATS WHY IT IS THE CASE. HE IS CONSTANTLY SAYING HE'S COMPETITIVE IN THESE RACES WHEN ACTUALLY HE IS NOT.
shaking my head since 2000, for the choice on our current president.
it's happening again!! i don't see any of these candidates capable of fixing the damage that has already been done way too deep.
but if i had to make a selection , i'll bite my lip and say: JOHN EDWADS. he's got a KENNEDY vision and the power of hope.
I have been following the debates very closely, the Cliton campaign has been on a rampage there, trying to say how much experience Hillary has to run the country. Her husband has foreshadowed her campaign as he runs from state to state representing her. Has anybody asked if Bill Cliton is running for a third term as president, which is against the Constitution?
Who is this guy...the media never brings him up. Is he running for president.
Is this Americas man who is fighting for Middle class americans with $500 haircuts.
I would love to vote Democratic but if Obama or Clinton are the choices I will vote Republican (middle class support is missing in Obama/Clinton)---Democratic party are you listening??
(My prior post was not posted because it criticized the media for unfair lack of coverage of Edwards.)
Please post my last post--10:37 am, Jan 19
I didn't read all of the posts. At the risk of repeating here........ The whole media thing boils down to the fairness in coverage as relates to canidates progress and the fact is that Edwards is only trailing Obama by 6 delegates. That is tight! The Republican Canidates that are NOT even on the chart get far more coverage. It's a shut out. As a columnist wrote... Edwards is pissing off all the RIGHT people.
The media is all Entertainment News. GO EDWARDS!
The next president should be chosen by the people not the media. Give John Edwards Equal Time.
ll the candidates have their good and bad points. The problem is, nobody is REALLY seeing/hearing about them. Edwards is being ridiculed for stating a fact – they are NOT covering all candidates equally – especially in the Democratic race. Edwards was a viable choice 7 years ago, why is he mostly ignored now? Those in the media should ask relevant questions and report the facts for ALL candidates. Period. Not push their own agenda, push one candidate over another every other day, or create news stories where there are none. I'm sick of soundbites intended to inflame and promote "news" that doesn't exist except in a few small minds.
The questions and answers in the debates have been mostly worthless in terms of telling us what the candidates will actually DO should they get elected. Does Clinton like pearls or diamonds? Please, get real. Not allowing Obama
his question? Unprofessional. Comments about the looks of Clinton's daughter, or stating that McCain is a lost cause because he is carrying a piece of luggage? These have no place in news commentary. Edwards is "angry"? Maybe he has a right to be. I sure am.
Priorities of the issues – all the issues – is vital to choosing a candidate. Don't use smokescreens to divert from the truly crucial issues. While I admit it's a legitimate issue of importance in some states, the 15 minutes spent talking about licenses for illegal immigrants (that was a Republican debate) when most people across the nation are much more worried about war, paying bills, health care, etc., just angered me.
I want to know a candidates position and a plan for action on issues that matter every single day. Let the candidates tell us in their own words, in detail. I'm sick of hearing the word "change", without any substance. I want to know HOW a candidate proposes to do that. Also, the fact is that no matter who gets elected, that person must still work with congress to get any proposal through to law. Perhaps the media might actually remind the candidates and the voters of that occasionally, lest we all get caught up in the mentality of expecting miracles. Compromise is a reality. Let each candidate tell me about their plans/positions on issues that matter, including education, social security, outsourcing, health care, abortion, guns, Iraq, Iran, the Patriot Act, etc., and how they expect to work with and unite both congress and the nation to put their ideas into action.
I'm sick of the bickering, which the media only fuels. I want a good president, and I want to make sure that the best person wins, not the best personality. Personally, I'm sad to see Biden and Richardson out of the running, they made the debates more interesting. I think when a candidate gets in the race, they should plan for at least a few states - especially in light of the obvious undecisiveness out there among voters.
Al Gore, where are you when we need you?
Google for Government: Americans have the right to know how their tax dollars are spent, but that information has been hidden from public view for too long. That's why Barack Obama and Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK) passed a law to create a Google-like search engine to allow regular people to approximately track federal grants, contracts, earmarks, and loans online. The Chicago Sun-Times wrote, "It would enable the public to see where federal money goes and how it is spent. It's a brilliant idea."
These are some of the things we want!
Again on CNN's web page only Obama mentioned on political page. KEEP THIS BLOG ALIVE-post on CNN' main web page or else the political page-Please CNN be fair in coverage!!!!! This blog is difficult to find---–Anybody have access to John Edward's campaign people-are they seeing this blog????
I do not think that the over 700 comments are posted.
This article has over 700 comments--The only CNN article with more comments that I see is an article about Huckabee. CNN should mention bloggers' comments on the air and the articles that are getting the most response. Do not let the media and a few states, with considerable small populations, determine the elections. Americans want choice!!!!!!
Edwards is right. I've been watching these last few weeks in amazement as story after story only mentioned Obama and Clinton. I thought maybe he might try to bring it up at the debate somehow. I'm afraid it may be too late now.
He would make a fantastic president.
EDWARDS OVER OBAMA
THE MEDIA WONT REPORT IT SO I WILL
Davis became Rezko's personal financial partner in slum-redevelopment deals, which were then backed by State Senator Obama.
In one of those deals, after both Obama and Davis had left the law firm, Obama wrote letters to state and city housing officials supporting the proposed Cottage View Terrace apartments, a project run by Tony Rezko and Allison S. Davis. The deal cost taxpayers $14 million and the partners got $855,000 in fees. Completed in 2002, the project is now managed by Davis's son Cullen Davis.
The Chicago Sun-Times reported in 2007 that Cottage View Terrace was originally supposed to be managed by Davis's longtime business partner, William Moorehead, until Davis's son was substituted. Moorehead was sent to prison in 2007 for stealing more than $1 million from the public housing projects he managed, including two he co-owned with Allison S. Davis.
– The University of Chicago and the CBOT -