The Horse's Mouth: More On The New York Times' Anti-Edwards Bias
According to this entry in the political blog, The Horse's Mouth by Greg Sargent, some more commentary on the recent New York Times public editor's comments on how the Times is covering this political race (and therefore influencing the outcome as readers of the New York Times -- who are not political junkies are really paying attention -- think it is a two-way race for the Democratic nomination when it is far from that:
To be fair, it's not hard to understand why Hillary and Obama -- both mega-wattage political stars whose candidacies are potentially history-making -- tend to suck up so much of the attention. Still, those numbers Hoyt shares suggest a sharp disparity in the coverage, particularly given that Edwards is in a virtual dead-heat with the two front-runners in Iowa.
To his credit, Richard Stevenson, the editor in charge of the paper's coverage of the
Right, right -- but quantity does matter. And the quantity of coverage given by the paper to Edwards has given readers the distinct impression that this is a two-person race, when it isn't. Luckily, there's still time to take a step towards getting this right, but that time is fast running out.