Palin vs Obama at the SMH

Romeo Mike has started the ball rolling by analysing how the SMH has been covering Obama and McCain/Palin. In my view, they are such one-eyed Obama-fans, I don't know why they haven't resorted to painting horns on every photo of Palin that they publish.

I did a search on the SMH website this morning, and started by searching for "Palin". Here are the results:

• Americans twitter vice-presidential debate - balanced article
  
• US braces for Palin debate with Biden - snide references as to whether Palin is up to it. Totally Obama-biased
• McCain defends 'maverick' Palin - has a number of digs at McCain and Palin. Totally Obama-biased
• Sarah Palin makes it big online - goes on to say that she is "not a big hit with voters". The story chronicles a number of web sites that make fun of Palin. There are many that have a similar dig at Obama, but none have been mentioned by the SMH. Totally Obama-biased by ommission.
• Sandra Bernhard cops Sarah Palin blowback - not sure what to make of this, but the lack of comment from the Obama camp is interesting. You'd think they'd chime in and say comments like Bernhard's are unacceptable, but the silence is deafening.
• I represent everyday Americans: Palin - this is a classic bit of juxtapositioning in an attempt to wreck here statement: "John McCain's running mate Sarah Palin has portrayed herself as a champion of everyday people, while noting her family's stock portfolio took a $US20,000 ($A25,200) hit last week." They are trying to have a dig at her here for being a stock-owning plutocrat, but of course she was referring to her retirement account - essentially her superannuation. Totally Obama-biased
• Feisty Palin escapes gaffes, but Biden wins snap polls - not sure what to make of this story yet.
• Palin has plenty in the bank: records - this story is a total stitch-up job: "Sarah Palin, who regularly tells voters she knows what it is like to struggle to pay the bills, earns nearly $US200,000 ($A259,487) and has substantial savings". What it fails to point out is that her family earns nearly $200,000 - that total amount includes the earnings of her husband. And yes, I think they'd have fun paying the bills, given that they have 5 kids and live in Alaska, which is an expensive place to live. That's also their gross income - it doesn't take into account the expenses that her husband incurs in running his fishing business. In short, totally Obama-biased. By comparison, I did a search for "obama + aragula", to see what the SMH had to say about Obama's famous arugula gaffe, and there is no mention of it on their website. Interestingly, that search on google returns 418,000 hits.
  
• A month after being a sensation, Palin's now a problem - they get their comments for this story from a Professor in Berkeley, possibly the most left wing place in Ameria. Puh-lease. Totally Obama-biased
• Judge will not block Palin firing probe - no comment
  
• Republicans gird for Palin debate - another hatchet job on Palin. Totally Obama-biased
• Palin true to herself and values - a positive story, but it was written by a Conservative

I then did a search on "obama".

• Aussie punter bets $50,000 on Obama win - I don't know why this should be of interest, except in order to fluff up Obama
• The Boss and Billy back Obama - who cares.
  
• McCain trusty but experience costs - a fairly balanced article, written by a Democrat. Interesting that a Democrat writes a more balanced article than is normally published in the SMH.
• Springsteen rocks Obama rally in Philly - a pure plug for Obama.
• Obama slams 'shameless' Palin - a pure plug for Obama.
• Obama accuses McCain of ignoring crisis - a re-write of the above story, with another plug for Obama, and a prissy photo of Palin
  
• Obama pulls ahead in the critical areas - a pure plug for Obama, featuring a photo that shows McCain looking clueless.
• Palin on attack over Obama's terrorist 'pal' - it starts as an attack on Obama, but 2/3 of the story is then devoted to Obama's defence.
• Round one: Obama takes narrow lead - fairly balanced
• Elbows fly in White House race - similar to the story on Obama's terrorist "pal" above, but 3/4 of it is devoted to fluffing up Obama
• Obama has huge lead over McCain -- in cyberspace - you can guess who this is tilted towards
• Obama takes campaign to the iPhone - a pure plug for Obama, and trying to paint McCain as out of touch with technology. The story might as well have been paid for by Obama.
• Obama grabs big lead in key US states - balanced
• US presidential election could come down to race - a story preparing the ground for "racists cost Obama the election"
• Obama, aka fat little Barry, remembered - a fluff piece on Obama
  
• Obama accuses McCain of sordid attacks amid economic peril - totally Obama tilted

I then did a search on McCain, and most of the stories that came up were the same.

• McCain leads in the 'burbs: poll - but the story then devotes about 50% of its space to an attack by Clinton on McCain. Typical.

So, we have one positive story, a few balanced stories and an absolute slew of Obama puff pieces. Note that if they run a positive story about Obama, no space is given over to any negatives from the Republican side. But if they run a vaguely positive piece on Palin or McCain, anywhere from 1/2 to 3/4 of the story is then devoted to attacks from the Democrats.

Interesting.