Opinion: Is the media doing a good job covering the campaign? Let the blame game begin

To the editor: Don’t forget to blame social media as well.

Clinton was buried by undeserved hate all spring and summer — and I was only reading the liberal posts.

( “Back story: ‘Believe me,’ his words have power. Or so ‘people say’,” Sept. 20 and “If Clinton loses, blame the media,” Opinion, Sept 21)

I hope she can prevail against her own party’s disgusting (and continuing) attacks.

Ted Herrmann, Los Angeles

::

To the editor: What, blame the media? That ignores the overarching role played by our ever more distracted, dumbed-down society.

It’s not the media’s fault that legions of low-information voters have become ever more captivated by insipid entertainment, and now embrace someone I see as an unhinged reality TV-star candidate utterly lacking for relevant experience and a coherent platform.

Were this campaign’s coverage to consistently highlight pertinent facts over titillating trivialities, the media would lose most of their audiences.

Sandra Perez, Santa Maria

::

To the editor: I agree with author Thomas Patterson‘s assessment of lopsided coverage regarding Clinton vs. Trump.

Every one of Trump’s embarrassing gaffes, outlandish claims, and idiotic pronouncements gets front page coverage, while days go by without a story on Clinton’s rational statements, clear ideas, and openly shared strategies.

Unless it’s pneumonia or another pundit’s take on her emails or personal life, Clinton is out of luck.

Shape up, media – and I used to be one of you— because every time Trump’s boorish face appears above the fold, it’s fodder for those who don’t understand that Hillary Clinton is the most qualified person ever to run for President.

Barbara Pronin, Placentia

::

To the editor: An op-ed by a Harvard professor? I’d like to make two points. First, really? And second, in defense of The Times, it has done everything it can to support Hillary Clinton.

John B. Smith, Palmdale

::

To the editor: Thomas Patterson, I agree. That Hillary Clinton has survived the constant attacks against her (and the media coverage of these attacks) just shows that a large number of people are paying attention to her actual abilities and accomplishments; we are ferreting out information somehow.

Regarding the never-ending flow of coverage on the email issue, I cannot remember reading a single comment about any damage done or not done by the use of a private server, except to Clinton personally, of course.

Ruth Silveira, Los Angeles

::

To the editor: Thanks to Patterson for voicing my growing frustration with the media on how Clinton is being covered.

Regarding the pneumonia incident: What I saw was a woman, who made every effort to soldier on. Don’t we all do that? Showing up at events when we’re under the weather and should have been home resting? Why hasn’t she been praised for being there no matter what?

Karen Goodman, Studio City

::

To the editor: Patterson has it right, although he doesn’t go far enough. It’s not just that Clinton has received unduly negative coverage, it’s that the media has largely given Trump a pass on all kinds of egregious behavior.

The most frustrating thing about this campaign is that Trump is widely perceived as being the trustworthy, honest candidate, when in reality, there is no reason to believe a word that comes out of his mouth.

I believe that Clinton, by contrast, rarely lies and mostly tells the truth, the opposite of what voters perceive.

We’ve heard about Clinton’s emails ad nauseam, but Trump’s many, more serious scandals barely get a passing notice.

It’s not too late. The media has gotten us into this mess, and it’s up to the media to get us out.

Seth Jackson, San Marino

::

To the editor: Patterson’s Op-Ed piece adds data to my own observations. I suppose, if you say “Hillary is not trustworthy” often enough, it becomes believable.

However, comparing Clinton’s flaws and errors to Trump’s is like comparing traffic tickets to bank robberies (which is not far from the truth with Trump). Do the research.

Starting in college, Clinton’s background is filled with positive stories – rarely mentioned by the press.

I believe she has to be one of the most intelligent and qualified candidates ever, someone who works behind the scenes in a bipartisan way, someone motivated by altruism. To me, Trump is just an unethical businessman driven by egoism, in no way qualified for the presidency.

Late in this campaign, one can only conclude that selling “the news” requires an emphasis on the negative and on making the contest look close. But it sure isn’t good journalism.

Bill Weber, La Canada

::

To the editor: I don’t think anyone can deny that Clinton has give a lifetime of service to our country. Most of her life she has worked to help poor women, children and those less fortunate. She has served as a senator and secretary of state, traveling to more than 100 countries to represent our nation. Yet her reward? To be dragged through an ocean of garbage by people who haven’t contributed a fraction of her service.

The world is full of problems. Blaming Clinton will not solve them. Solutions are never convenient or easy. No single person has all the answers. Compromises have to be made. Instead of blaming, start building bridges to our future.

Phil Beauchamp, Chino Hills

::

To the editor: Patterson, you just don’t get it. The reason 91 % of reports about her e-mail use were negative, as you wrote, is that her behavior was inappropriate.

The reason 92% of reports about her character and personal life were negative, as you wrote, is that there are definite flaws. And her accomplishments as first lady, U.S. Senator and Secretary of State barely surfacing speaks for itself. I agree with you: “She may as well have spent those years baking cookies.”

Connie Veldkamp, San Clemente

::

To the editor: I say let all the opinions and ideas flow freely and let the voters decide. Our founding fathers and many others agree.

All candidates start on equal footing with the media and it is their job to use it to their best advantage; the voters decide the outcome. Unfortunately for Clinton, she seems to have little political prowess with media and is unable to deflect the conversation to real issues.

John Lundberg, Palos Verdes Estates

Follow the Opinion section on Twitter @latimesopinion and Facebook