Skip to comments.ABC-TV “This Week” Subliminally Slants Coverage To Boost Hillary.
Posted on 04/06/2008 12:42:41 PM PDT by MindBender26
ABC-TV This Week Subliminally Slants Coverage To Boost Hillary.
TV news slants their coverage in favor of liberalism and its proponents in many ways. Who is interviewed, what is edited out, the choice of spokespersons, all give the liberal corporate network leadership, especially at ABC, the chance to lean their coverage far to the left.
But there is an even more insidious way to slant coverage, and its all done before any newsmaker speaks one word. This mornings This Week with George Stephanopoulos was a classic example.
On the surface, it was a fair debate, Republican Senator Lindsey Graham on one side, Hillary Clinton acolyte Democrat Jim Webb on the other. Forget for a moment that Graham is from the left wing of the Republican party, so ABCs choice of him as a spokesperson is suspect from the outset. But ABC did much more to boost Hillary Clinton, who they would like to nominate for sainthood as well as president.
So much of television is the vision element. The person who looks good is seen as the winner of debates. Remember Kennedy v. Nixon in 1960. Anyone who heard that debate on radio knows Nixon won on logic, truth and reality. But the 80% of Americans who watched the debate on TV, rather than listening on radio, were swayed by Kennedys boyish good looks, rather than by his boorish logic.
Today, on This Week, they did it again.
First, the camera shots of Stephanopoulos and Democrat Webb (arguing for Hillarys nomination) were from slightly above their eye level. That is the best talking head camera positioning for TV appearances. Graham, on the other hand, was shot from a camera pedestal down position, decidedly below eye level, accentuating the lose skin on his neck. It was a very unflattering up the nostrils shot.
Secondly, the color mix was different for the three debate participants. Stephanopoulos and Webb had rosy, warm pink complexions. The color settings on the camera covering Senator Graham were adjusted much more toward the green end of the color spectrum. He looked pasty, washed out, even a little green around the gills. It was subliminal but when the two senators were shown side by side, it was very obvious that Webb looked bright and healthy, Graham looked sick and tired . and TV technicians can do that all with one twist of a dial.
Thirdly, they were able to make the color balance different for Graham than it was for Stephanopoulos and Webb because the two Dems were in the studio in Washington, while Graham was in South Carolina. Viewers always give more credibility to a guest in the studio than one appearing via a satellite remote, as Senator Graham was.
Fourth, the two different settings gave them the opportunity for one more nod to Webb. The camera covering Webb was always focused with a tighter, more close-up shot then Senator Grahams coverage. Viewers give more credibility to the person appearing larger on the screen, and Webb was always shown about 15% larger than Graham.
Did these things happen by accident? I can tell you from 30 years in TV, absolutely not. They are all checked and re-checked again a dozen times.
These may seem like little things, but added up, they can easily decide public opinion, or even an election.
Just ask Nixon.
George Steffi KNOWS they have his FBI FILES!
Actually, Graham did a very good job for our side verbally, but the visuals were all against him.
Still, my description of him as a ‘Lap Dog’ is appropriate, don't you agree?
How can anybody think A.B.C. is anything but biased?
George Stephanopoulos was and still is a Clinton operative.
George owes his lofty position directly to Bill.
The Clintons have operatives like this placed all over for times of need. Sort of like the mob helps folks become judges just for special occasions when they need something.
Only difference is that the mob has less folks killed then the Clintons.
So the MSM is corrupt. This is just more proof. None of this nonsense happens by accident.
Yet another reason I can’t watch Stepogopolis. ABC always shoots him in the soft, vaseline lens type focus with close-ups that are a little too damn close.
ABC-TV This Week Subliminally Slants Coverage To Boost Hillary....
who watches...so who knew???
“George Steffi KNOWS they have his FBI FILES!”
Yep, Snuffleupagus was shilling for Hitlery for sure. But, he’s no worse than Fester Dolt, Gnat Liar or many of the other Manhattan-Martini-Marionettes (MMM).
Or why I don’t watch TV.
I hate to tell you this, MindBender, but Fox honcho Rupert Murdoch is a Clintonista, too, although his network doesn’t show the boss’s biases all that flagrantly.
What was the subject of the Graham vs. Webb “debate”?
FWIW, I went through the Daily News (NY) today. There were a few references to McCain’s age and health. There was a favorable reference to Obama. There were none of the usual puff pieces or tidbits for Mrs. Clinton. A year ago, there would have been.
The main thing I came away thinking, as I usually do, is that Katrina vanden Heuvel has no business being on a news show. She’s intemperately partisan and everything she utters is unabashed spin for the far left. She was so bad this morning that not only was George Will audibly chuckling but even Cokie Robert looked like she was trying not to laugh in her face.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.