Editorial Influence

The Washington Express should be ashamed for printing such disgraceful jargon about the length of McCain's arms (Oct. 17,2008). see: http://www.expressnightout.com/content/2008/10/candidates_reveal_themselves_in_final_de.php

The paper's complete disregard for vetting such insensitive commentary displays the obvious political leaning and favoritism of the rag and its complete lack of editorial tact.

Aside from the recent decline in articles about Amy Winehouse--something I knew I could always count on at least 3 days a week-- the other very consistent and noticible trend in the Express, and many other network and paper media outlets (including the Presidential Debates), is that Sen. Obama's name is always referenced first, with Sen. McCain second. Either I'm crazy or my elementary school educators misled me into thinking that "M" comes before "O." Not to mention McCain is a senior Senator as opposed to Obama's mere 1+ year(s) actually "working" in the Senate. In which case, let's not make it so obvious that Obama is clearly getting preferential treatment from the vast majority of the media.

Pick up a newspaper, or log on to CNN.com, and what do you see? Obama, perhaps with a minor mention or thumb size picture of McCain next to Obama's 8x10. What do you say we stop feeding Obama's already super-inflated ego.

Why not give equal treatment, access, and exposure to both candidates during an election cycle as opposed to mearly promoting one candidate over another. Is there no longer any responsibility on behalf of the press to report fairly, to be balanced, to report realities rather than printing one-sided articles? Let's be fair and let the people determine who they want in the Casa Blanca; not allow Hollywood money and the media to determine the election.

How about equal access and an unbiased perspective of both candidates...? Nah...because that would be the right thing to do.