Report: Media concluded Romney won race in February

Michigan win led to a decisive shift in media coverage

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • Eric Greene Holladay, UT
    April 23, 2012 8:22 p.m.

    Looks like the media speaks and the people follow.

    Gone are the days of substantial research on candidate ideology, as well as the ideology itself.

    Romney's a good guy, right? No need to look at his record, right? No second guesses as to whether you would vote for his exact record if he wasn't Mormon, right?

    Do your research. Think about the issues. Don't simply assume.

  • Howard Beal Provo, UT
    April 23, 2012 12:03 p.m.

    Interesting, because most of the media I watched or read said this was going to drag out to June at least or to the convention. A lot of stuff about how Romney couldn't seal the deal, had significant opposition, couldn't rally the conservative/evangelical/tea part vote etc.

    Maybe I was watching and reading other media than these guys...

  • JRJ Pocatello, ID
    April 23, 2012 11:24 a.m.

    To furry

    Sighhh, how long can you people continue blaming GB for everything? He's a real gentleman to not lash back at the nonsense and stupidity that accompanies liberal politics. He was way more of a president than Obamaniaca will ever be......hopefully for only another 9 months if we can stand it.

  • AZRods Maricopa, AZ
    April 23, 2012 11:05 a.m.

    furry, it's convenient that you still, after 3 years are blaming Bush, then you leave off the fact that the dems controlled the house and the senate for years before Bush left.
    You criticize the Reps. for not helping Obama, yet they had control of everything up until late last year.
    But, if you're going to give Obama credit for getting Osama, as if he practically did it with his own bare hands, then you also get to give Obama credit for destroying the credit rating of our country. You see, that happened under Obama's watch, so you can't cherry pick the few (very few) bright spots and blame the rest on someone else. And tell me you wouldn't be bashing Bush if this secret service thing happened under his watch. Hardly.
    By the way, how's that bright shiny budget President Obama came up with being received by his own party?
    Not much of an economy wiz is he? Big surprise.
    But he can organize a community like nobody's business!

  • Joe Moe Logan, UT
    April 23, 2012 8:27 a.m.

    Now, can we do a similar analysis over the next couple of weeks, and find out who is going to be the president next year? And maybe then we can even skip the part where we ask voters in November what they think.

  • Furry1993 Clearfield, UT
    April 23, 2012 7:28 a.m.

    To toosmartforyou | 12:26 a.m. 4/23

    Obama's record: cleaning up the mess left to him by GWBush, economic indicators improving, unemployment decreasing, 24 months of increasing employment, manufacturing returning to the United States -- yes it took expenditures to bring about the improvements, but they are now starting to bear fruit -- and don't forget removal/death of terrorist leaders. And all that despite the efforts of the Republicans and those on the far right to make him fail. Just think what he could have accomplished if he had had some help from the Republicans and far-righters instead of constant obstruction.

    As to the secret service "thing" -- why is that President Obama's fault? Are you saying that he issued instructions that his protective detail could act like pigs on their personal time off? Are you saying that your employer should be responsible if your co-workers went out and caroused? Somehow I don't think so.

    Put the blame for the secret service incident where it belongs -- on the secret service agents who acted improperly. They are quickly being made to pay the price for their actions. That is the appropriate way to handle it.

  • Stephen Kent Ehat Lindon, UT
    April 23, 2012 7:13 a.m.


    "Only 7 percent of stories featured the Texas congressman [Ron Paul] as a significant newsmaker, compared with 59 percent for Romney, 31 percent for Santorum and 30 percent for Gingrich."

    "Newsmaker" is an interesting term. The print media is very good at reporting news by newsmakers. And when it comes to television news, the local news media seem to do a very good job of reporting news by newsmakers.

    But for some reason, the national television outlets seem to fill their time slots with conversations between and among reporters and pundits, talking to each other.

    Have you ever noticed? Look for it. An anchor person interviews another person who is employed by the same news organization. One talk show host or news anchorperson asks questions of another pundit or commentator.

    The "newsmakers" who are in office or running for office or heads of agencies appointed to office or being kicked out of office are not interviewed as much as may be needed to get to the real news by those who should be considered the newsmakers.

    Like I say, however, the print media seems to do a better job of covering the newsmakers.

  • Ares Cottonwood Heights, UT
    April 23, 2012 6:49 a.m.

    And if he didn't... Deseret News would not write an article about it.

  • toosmartforyou Farmington, UT
    April 23, 2012 12:26 a.m.

    Well, Mark, he has to live with his record so that's the problem for Mr. Obama.

    This thing with the secret service is expanding, too. I'm sure he wishes it would just go away.

  • mark Salt Lake City, UT
    April 22, 2012 10:53 p.m.

    "Obama did not enjoy a single week of coverage that was more positive than negative. "

    Hahaha. That is funny stuff! All I hear from conservative pundits is how much President Obama has the media in his pocket.
    You would think that for somebody with the media in his corner the guy could get at least one week of positive coverage.