The Media’s Role In Gas Prices

The media doesn’t matter anymore, it just doesn’t.

At one time it was known as the “Fourth Estate” and I often referred to it as the “Fourth Branch Of Government”. I clearly remember when the WH Press Corps were equally tough on all presidents, and their press secretaries. Their jobs were to get the facts and stories, regardless of their personal ideologies and leanings. Breaking the big one or asking the question that got an official to slip up with something else that could be used in an exclusive was the objective. But today, it is not the case.

One reason is demonstrated in the Media Matters controversy, as exposed by the Daily Caller’s current series. There is a vicious circle and no one is quite sure where the beginning and the end is, but we all know from where the money comes.

My good blog friend AC over at ForeLeft has pointed out some differences in the way the media is handling the rising gas prices under Obama, as opposed to when Bush was in office. He hears Jay Carney deflect the questioning on the current increases Americans are seeing at the pumps.

“There are no magic solutions to rising oil prices,” said White House press secretary Jay Carney. “The rising gas prices clearly the effect of a variety of factors on the global price of oil,” he told reporters, citing geopolitical unrest and rapid growth in India and China.

Being the astute thinker he is, AC remembers and remembers well. He links to an old Think Progress posting that basically ridiculed Bush’s explanation that there is no magic wand on dealing with gas prices.

Immediate action to deal with rising gas prices should deal with the root problems, not worsen them. Center for American Progress analysts Sam Davis and Daniel J. Weiss describe how a demand-independent “reliefbate” plan could be paid for by closing several oil tax loopholes. The Washington Post’s Dan Froomkin further recognizes that there are “two hugely significant factors” that President Bush could affect immediately: “the war in Iraq and the value of the dollar.”

Looks good on paper, but there is just one thing that perplexes me. Obama ended the war in Iraq. He has brought our troops home and the economy is supposedly getting better now.

But let’s get back to the Reuters article about the current situation. Let’s look at how this Obama-philic organization is content to report this story.

Here is how it begins:

Under fire from Republicans over rising gasoline prices, the White House on Tuesday highlighted factors beyond its control for gains in global oil markets, as it sought to deflect blame over a potentially damaging election-year issue.

Now let’s notes this Reuters article where the magic wand quote came from:

U.S. President George W. Bush said on Tuesday there was no “magic wand” to bring down record-high fuel prices but would consider a proposal to suspend federal gasoline taxes this summer — an idea that has divided the 2008 presidential candidates.

Trying to calm anxious Americans facing $3.60 a gallon gasoline and soaring grocery bills, Bush again prodded Congress to open an Alaska wildlife refuge to oil drilling and allow construction of more nuclear and coal plants.

Note my emphasis in both passages. Note how Reuters presented a picture that it is the GOP who is making the charges about the Administration being responsible for the gas price hikes, as if to politicize this issue. But when it was Bush in the WH, we read that  it’s angry Americans.

For those of us who read a lot of news, it’s easy to see. While it may sound subtle, the power of subtle suggestion cannot be disregarded when trying to analyze data that is provided to us, by a media that is taking cues from a left-wing George Soros PAC.

Foolish? Nitpicking? Maybe.

But let’s also consider another article published by Reuters the very same day as the “magic wand” article:

The Bush administration says the United States would be less addicted to foreign oil and fuel prices would be lower if Congress had only opened up Alaska’s Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to drilling.

But that claim doesn’t reflect the long lead time to develop the refuge’s huge oil reserves, which would not be available for several more years and initial volumes would still be small if Congress in 2002 had approved the administration’s plan to drill in ANWR, energy experts say.


This is an expert’s statement (again with my emphasis):

“Even if oil was flowing, it would be too small amount to reduce the price” of crude or gasoline, said Daniel Weiss, energy expert at the Center for American Progress, a think tank in Washington.

“President Bush’s claim ignores the primary causes behind record high oil prices: a cheap dollar, high demand from China and India, and speculators driving the price up. Drilling and sullying the Arctic would not address any of these causes of high oil prices,” said Weiss.

Center for American Progress is another Soros funded entity that feeds news stories into the MSM, in the same manner as Media Matters.

So somehow, Reuters presents a senior fellow from a left wing think tank an expert on oil production and it’s potential effect on gas prices. These are the same people who argue that supply and demand are irrelevant in the course of how gas prices are set. And while the jury was out as to how much oil would have been flowing in 2012 had ANWR been tapped, we do know we would be much closer now–if not already there. Add to this, there is less oil is being pumped in the Gulf because rigs were pulled and sent to Brazil. And the media just lets it happen, without so much as a follow-up question.

Oil production down, prices up. Oil production down, more dependence on foreign oil. Give us the payroll tax extension to cover the rising costs of fuel, no real relief found. Then as fuel costs continue to rise, so does the price of everything else that gets transported by truck.

It’s a vicious circle brought to us by the Obama Administration and the Media who covers for him.



Filed under Administration, Media, Progressives

2 responses to “The Media’s Role In Gas Prices

  1. Obama doesn’t give a damn that these rising costs of petroleum products are going to bring us to our knees economically. See THIS for more on the damage that Obama is doing. Excerpt:

    – No coal (dirty, comes from the ground)
    – No oil (see above)
    – No nuclear (see Japan)
    – No windborne (kills birds)
    – No water-powered (means more dams and reservoirs)
    – No geothermal (not enough, too unstable)
    – No solar power (eats too much arable land, requires too much water for cleaning)

    What’s left?

    YOU. Pedaling a bicycle on a pulley system connected to some fan blades in summer.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s