The media vs. Ron Paul

Bias in the media is never OK.

However, it also seems to be something that media consumers have grown used to.  But where do we draw the line between political bias and just plain not playing fair?  

Following the Aug. 11 GOP debate in Ames, Iowa, Fox News posted a poll on their website so viewers could vote on who they thought won the debate. Later they reported the results on television: Newt Gingrich in first place with 4751 votes, Herman Cain in second place with 2425 votes, and Mitt Romney in third place with 1870 votes.

I watched this report in disbelief.  I had the poll opened on my computer right in front of me when this information was reported.  Texas Congressman Ron Paul was listed in first place with 7796 votes.

The GOP presidential candidates have taken over the news in past months and of course they should, we all need to know our options.  At this time there are eight candidates for the Republican Party, but members of both liberal and conservative media networks would have you believe that there are only seven.

The 2012 election will be Texas Congressman Ron Paul's third bid for the presidency.  This time around he has more support than ever and is consistently coming out near the top in straw polls, online polls and other surveys. 

Media coverage of the Ames, Iowa straw poll scarcely mentioned Ron Paul who lost to preferred Tea Party candidate, Michelle Bachmann, by the narrow margin of 0.9 percent. 

Ron Paul proved victorious at the both the 2010 and 2011 CPAC straw polls.  In 2011, when Fox News reported these results, they showed the video of the announcement from 2010. The 2010 crowd can clearly be heard both booing and cheering.

Since last year Congressman Paul has gained a lot more support and the crowd at this year's CPAC straw poll was much more supportive and you can easily hear the difference. Why are they trying to hide Ron Paul's popularity?

Examples of this media blackout are endless, and to prove it all you have to do is turn on your TV. When Ron Paul does get media attention, it is focused on the fact that he is "unelectable." You can find evidence of this simply by tuning in to any news network.

If Ron Paul is doing so well in the polls, then how can we say is unelectable?

In August Jon Stewart of The Daily Show called out the media for their blatant omission of Ron Paul from their reports.  During his show he pointed out that discussions and interviews that talk about the "top tier" of the race would mention Rick Perry, Mitt Ronmey, Michelle Bachmann and Herman Cain. Even candidates nowhere near the "top tier" got mention, like Rick Santorum or John Huntsman.

"When did Ron Paul become the thirteenth floor of a hotel?" Stewart asked.

Ron Paul is consistently part of the "top tier".  He is also consistently ignored when people actually talk about it on the news.

The President of the United States is supposed to be chosen by the people.  How are the people going to be able to make the best possible decision if the media isn't bringing them all of the facts?  Why are we allowing this to happen?  Agree with the congressman or not, why wouldn't you want to know about all of your options?

To me this is very disturbing.  Maybe it's just because I think Ron Paul makes sense. Maybe it's because I study journalism, but not delivering the whole truth goes against everything you learn in school about ethics.

Fed up with being ignored, Ron Paul's many loyal fans launched the "Black This Out" money bomb, an online fundraising event meant to send a message to the media. They will not be censored. On Oct. 19 the money bomb raised over $2 million in donations from his supporters.

To change this we need to speak out. Either as supporters of Ron Paul or just people who want the whole truth.

For more information about Ron Paul, go to www.ronpaul2012.com

Mia Summerson can be reached by email at summerson.record@live.com.