Did the MSM win the New Hampshire Primary?

There are at least two reasons why one might think so.  

Before elaborating, however, let me first say this isn't a knock against the Hillary campaign. Congrats to them (including their volunteers) for having pulled out a primary victory which nobody seems to have expected. And, second, now that it's once again an open question who will get the nomination, a significantly greater number of Americans from other parts of the country will have the opportunity to participate in our democracy. That's a good thing.

All that aside, what about the MSM?

First things first: the MSM has just gotten the best of both worlds. On the one hand, polls across the board licensed a dramatic media narrative charting the rise and anticipated historic coronation of the first African American nominee for the Presidency of the United States. That, by itself, would have satisfied the MSM's appetite for a sound-bite story of monumental proportions. But the MSM got more than that, since Obama's ascendance appeared to come at the expense of the woman Republicans most love to hate. How often does the media have a story of such magnitude and with so much appeal for, collectively, a large number of Democrats, seemingly all Republicans, and despirited Independents craving a breath of fresh air?

Of course, the possibility of Obama winning New Hampshire by a landslide was also a threat. Were the nominee coronated at the first primary, then the remainder of the Democratic primary season might well lose its luster. Despite the fluid nature of the Republican race and the dramatic possibility of a brokered convention, the dismal cast of characters can only generate so much excitement among conservatives continually dissatisfied with their choice of candidates. Fortunately for the MSM, Hillary's New Hampshire victory transforms the initial threat into a bona fide horse race narrative. Also to their benefit, John Edwards placed a distant third, a poor showing which no doubt will be invoked to justify a blackout of the candidate most likely to offend the corporate interests underwriting the mainstream media.  

Second, it's worth asking whether the MSM scored yet a further victory in New Hampshire. In the past seventy-two hours, we've witnessed a series of anti-Hillary stories, ranging from the uncharitable to the ill-researched, to the ridiculous. This is admittedly speculative, but were these stories efficacious in the decision of some to cast their vote for Hillary? The following anecdotes from some readers at TPM caught my eye:

I have been an Obama supporter since 04, gave money to him this year, own the t-shirt, etc., etc. But the sexist bullsh-t these past days (I am a woman) from the media is making me root for her to win this tonight.

I almost wonder if more Dems didn't vote for Hillary to counter the BS media narrative about rejecting the Clintons once and for all. I say this as someone who has given 1500 bucks to Obama, gone to several of his events out here in CA, met him, and plan to vote for him. Part of me, however, was so pissed about this media narrative about Hillary and the Clintons in general that I had in the back of my mind that I would consider voting for her just to piss the media off. That's not going to happen now as it appears we have a real race, but still . . .This whole media narrative sickened me.

I have been on the fence throughout this campaign, liking John Edwards more than the others. The media coverage of Sen. Clinton has caused my blood to boil. I can not bear to witness blatant misogyny. Gloria Steinheim's article in the NYT this morning was so on the mark. If I lived in New Hampshire, I would have voted for Sen. Clinton today. I would not allow the talking heads to tell me who to vote for or declare this race over. And I certainly was not going to participate in the sexist bs that has been spewing out the mouths of the likes of Chris Matthews.

The alleged "independent mindset" of New Hampshire voters aside, it's worth asking what, if any, percent of those who cast their vote for Hillary did so in reaction to the trash that was thrown at her by the MSM. I wouldn't think it a huge number, but neither would I discount it altogether. Perhaps 5% of those who voted for Hillary did so in response to the MSM? Or maybe just 3%? With victory declared and 95 precincts reporting, Clinton leads Obama with 2% of the vote.

Congratulations to the MSM on a surprising victory in New Hampshire. Few, if any, of us saw it coming.