Chelsea Clinton campaign - Essay Example

Sometimes, as impossible as it is, I just wish that the news would get out of politics. It seems that the news cannot keep their unbiased cover that they need to, and that they do in all honesty tend to influence the turn out of elections, even if they do not purposefully mean to. It really bothers me, and several news events during the course of the primaries have only proven this. Overall, the news has really tried to influence the political process this year, and has been putting too much of their own political beliefs in it.

First off, the McCain scandal was perfectly laid at a crucial time in the election. Sure, he had just pretty much secured the nomination as front runner, but it was just as he began to shift towards working on the general election. On small, here comes this possible scandal with him and a former co-worker. Not something any politician wants to deal with just as they are emerging at the front, and it was especially crucial timing for the New York Times to choose to put the story out at that particular moment in time.

Yet again, it seems the news tries to influence the election any way they possibly can. With yet another event, the Belgrade incident, it seems the news tries to pick the news to either benefit or hurt one candidate. Showing these events at the American embassy would definitely become an international event, and would almost force politicians to take some stance on foreign affairs, and it would seemingly hurt those were of "certain" opinion of those said foreign affairs. The press put this event in at a critical time of the election, and showing the violence over there was sure to influence people and bring both the need of experience for ou president as well as their thoughts on foreign policy to the forefront on the voter's minds.

The press seems to also put certain events under certain lighting to make them effect how people will view the candidate, and which issued people will think about more when they are deciding which candidate to support. The Obama and Clinton final battle in Texas has been one of the worst case scenarios of the campaign. Did anybody else notice at the recent debate how they let Obam finish all of his questions yet they constantly cut Clinton off That is not fair politics in any way shape or form, and I am an Obama supporter!

They still now are showing the news in a pro-Obama fashion, and while he has been leading, they still should devote the same time to each candidate, something they have not been doing since the start of the campaign. When there were a myriad of candidates, the front runners got all the green light, and everyone else was forced to fight for their time in the spot light. It was the same in the way they dealt with Chelsea Clinton. She knows everything about Hillary, and was a youthful spokesperson, and to attack her was to also attack any part of Clinton's core campaign.

Attacking her on national televisions was a low blow for any reporter, and I cannot blame the Clinton Campaign for their words back about possibly boycotting any of MSNBC's future debates. To personally attack a candidate or a member of their family like that is stepping over the media's moral boundary, and was simply wrong. She just can't seem to get a break from the influence of the news. She comes under just as much fire sometimes simply because she is related to Hillary. For the most part this is fair, but sometimes you should leave a politician's family out of the campaign and let people see the politician for who they really are, not just what the news wants people to see of their family.

In conclusion, I feel that the news has been doing a horrible job of staying impartial, and has severely affected the course of this election, for better or for worse. For the most part there is nothing you can do about it, but I hope that when it comes time for the general election the news and the media does a much better job of keeping enough time for both candidates and making sure to treat each one of them fairly.