1 vote

Letter to local news station

I got frustrated while watching election coverage the other day on my local news and expressed my frustration with their lack of coverage of Ron Paul. Here is what I wrote to them.

"Where is Ron Paul in your reporting? What I have seen on your "news" is completely biased reporting and it is sickening. One would conclude that Ron Paul has dropped out and Mitt Romney is guaranteed the nomination from your reporting, but that is far from the truth. I want to know what is the truth? Why are you guys not reporting on him? Just recently, it has been confirmed that he won Iowa, overwhelmingly won Minnesota (in delegates), and there are more to come. People will really start to question your reporting when he is on the ballot in November, and you have not talked about him in months!"

And today I got a response.

The reason we are not covering Ron Paul is twofold:

1) No one on a national level is covering Ron Paul at this point. It’s highly likely at this point Mitt Romney is going to win the Republican nomination, especially with Newt Gingrich dropping out this week and Rick Santorum dropping out several weeks ago.

2) Paul currently has the fewest delegates won at 79. That’s less than 1/10th of Mitt Romney’s 844. http://elections.nytimes.com/2012/primaries/delegates

I noticed you didn’t mention Rick Santorum. Should we still be covering him because he has the second most at 260?

I’m glad to have you as a viewer, but your accusations that we’re biased because we haven’t covered a candidate who hasn’t done anything newsworthy as of late is out of line. If we’re biased, then so is any other major or minor news outlet across the nation.

Please feel free to call or email me any time if you’d like to discuss this further.



Lane Kimble
Newswatch 12
715-365-8812 ext. 320

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

If we're biased...

"If we’re biased, then so is any other major or minor news outlet across the nation".

Exactly! Just what tolso222 is trying to point out.

I know, I liked that line too...My response was:


Half of the delegates haven't even been counted yet. Paul still has a legitimate shot at the nomination, Romney hasn't been declared winner yet so why not cover all of the candidates? And to say that Paul hasn't done anything newsworthy lately is completely your opinion. How about Romney's family members endorsing Ron Paul? http://www.marketwatch.com/story/ron-paul-idaho-team-welcome...

Or the rally of 4,500 people in Philadelphia in the pouring rain, or the 5,000 people in madison, or any of the places he speaks! Romney does not get those kinds of numbers.

No, you shouldn't be covering Santorum anymore, because he dropped out. All I'm asking is for fair and balanced reporting, because it frustrates me when people have never heard of Ron Paul due to the media never reporting anything about him and failing to even acknowledge if he is still running. So yes, I still feel it's biased reporting, and I would have to agree with you that each and every other news media outlet is biased as well when it comes to covering Dr. Paul. Thank you for your time.

You might respond with the fact

that several members of Romney's family are stumping for Paul. That should be newsworthy...