Moron, er, More On the Press

It was much remarked upon last night and this morning how Hillary's campaign framed the scene for her speech last night, with many young people behind her and no Bill (except for a perfunctory hug before she spoke), Madeleine Albright, Wes Clark, etc. - an effort (if you're a cynic) to match Obama's picture of enthusiasm or (if not so much) to demonstrate her breadth of support. Yet, turn to the front page of the New York Times this morning or the two Clinton pictures on the front page of its on-line edition and there's Bill and Chelsea and a bunch of guys in ties. Now, media organs are in no way obligated to buy into a campaign's spin - and I think they are duty bound to resist it – but given the extent to which they do just regurgitate it as a matter of course, the Times' photo selection strikes me as an editorial rather than a news judgment.

On this blog , grill has said:

While I am an undecided, the over-the-top response from the press over the last few days made me consider supporting Hillary just to tell them to eph off, they don't know what we want for our party.

I find I am reacting the same way.  I could vote just as easily for Obama as for Clinton, but everything I write lately seems to have a pro-Clinton bent because the coverage seems so slanted.