Does the media purposefully ignore Ron Paul or down play his results?

I think that the medial as a whole is scared of Ron Paul. This isn't a "liberal" media thing, this is ALL media outlets (notice the lack of attention on FOX News). Ron has already said he would do open up the government, and many in the government WON'T allow that to happen. He COULD be the greatest president, he COULD be the worst, but we will never know because he WON'T ever be elected.

They don't like him because he won't be a Chickenhawk president and he won't go off to war because some company thinks its a good idea. Ron Paul is also a person who will stick by his principles which means the Media won't have a story like they will have with a Romney Presidency or even the Obama Administration. I mean how many times has Obama gone back on a position that he claimed to have held like ending the Wars as the first thing he does. Also how about the closing Gitmo or ending the Bush Era things. Ron Paul would do what he said he was going to do and he would stick to the Constitution in doing so. They don't want him to be President because people would know where he stood on things and their wouldn't be any hooks for Fox News or the other Media outlets to use to keep people watching their Entertainment Only Shows.

The media definitely ignores Ron Paul as much as they can. I think he scares "the powers that be" and we know the media is in their back pockets. There are things about Ron Paul that I don't care for, but then I wonder if what I hear is true or if it's taken out of context. Jon Stewart was right on this time!

Personally I'm surprised it didn't generate more news when Bachmann started accusing him of buying off her campaign chairman. He is getting SOME media coverage now, but they still play down his showings in the polls and the recent primary. They're acting like Gingrich is still in the hunt despite coming in below Ron Paul and not even qualifying to be on the Virginia ballot.

Although I don't like the fact that television is a crooked business, I can see why they don't like Ron Paul. He's just not a good story. He never has been. He's boring. He has some really fanatic followers who would put a stink on any network daring to seem fair to him. And he's been at this forever, and never has there been a big, national buzz around him. He doesn't have the looks. He doesn't speak well. A lot of his views will be construed as nutso. He's just not a winning candidate for ratings. Print media shouldn't care, but television media should. It's not my standard, but it is the game they created. Paul's only good headline fodder if he says or does something worthy of reprimand. I don't know if all media attempt to push candidates per any sort of ideological bent. We know that some do. We only have to look back as far as Barack Obama in 2008 to see just how many news sources, TV and otherwise, were so far in the tank for the man that they had to create a larger tank. Those schmoes aside, I think everyone else just goes with a candidate who has more potential to bring in ratings. It reminds me a bit of Moneyball. They're not looking for what matters in candidates. They want someone square jawed and well spoken; established and haughty. They're all looking to throw the white hat on someone to get good numbers, when, right under their noses, they're the ones who actually create and promote the standard yet don't realize it.

We know that the government started the whole television/radio thing in the first place. It would be crazy to think that they wouldn't have their hands in the mass media cookie jar now. The super elite certainly have their choices and as much as we would like to think that our votes count...the only votes that really count are electoral and that means the people we "voted" for to represent our state is the ones that actually elect the President and Vice. To who do they really owe their election? Well..it often boils down to campaign money and donations. The average joe certainly does not have the means to support these things. What is $500 compared to thousands? I wouldn't even be able to donate that much to a race and do very well compared to others in our current economy. The news shows us what they want us to see. I do believe they push for the ones the super elite pay them to push for and oh...mustn't forget the riff raff and rumors that raise ratings either! There is the freedom of speech thing..but the thing with that is that they choose what to say and when to say it. Money and power can influence greatly what people "want" to say.

Surely you don't expect the media to actually be fair and honest, or to give the voters the REAL facts, now do you? It really isn't that much different that past election coverage. They pick their favorites, the favorites (who probably pay them off with both money and politics - after all they want elected) get the coverage and the others don't. Then it snowballs, and the favorites are the ones that get the votes because they are the one the people heard about. Not to mention that Paul scares the heck out of a lot of people, the media, government, even some voters. So they try to keep him out of the spotlight and hide his message. Until Americans get fed up and start saying something, this is just going to continue. It may already be too late to change things. Most people have lost faith in the media, government, and the political system as a whole and have just plain given up. Unfortunately, that has the added effect of letting the status quo just continue....even if it is just plain wrong.