When the main-stream media covers political topics, its treament of Democrats tends to be favorable and when it covers Republicans it is VERY critical. We no longer have an unbiased press, searching for answer and being uniformly critical of ALL politicians, but a politicaly active media that pushes an agenda.
When a "potential" dem scandle breaks, the main stream media tends to run-interference and search for excuses why it's nothing to pay attention to, or it outright ignores the story. While when a "potential" repub scandle breaks, we get indept pressing for answers and VERY critical probing questions searching for evidence of ill-doings.
In 2012, Dirty Harry Ried went to the Senate floor and lied (something he's admitted to) about Romney not paying taxes. The Media was "all over it" and kept pressing Romney on granular detail.
Hillary Clinton is now accussed of doing EXACTLY what Romney was accused of, but there is no media "Pressing" her for answer or explinations. Hillary Clinton is going back to redo SEVERAL years of tax returns (5 years as of today) for the failure to include income/political contributions. She claims that the over 1,000 line items ommision were "Just a mistake of placing it in the wrong column". Tax records from her contributors show she has hidden millions of dollars of income, approaching $100 million dollars.
Where is the Press on this? They are trying to cover it up. Evidence George Stephanopoulos CHIEF news Anchor at ABC . When a book was written showing evidence of Clintons wrong doing, the attack dogs came out to silence the messenger and protect the Dem. Stephanopoulos was a political operative of the Clintons on the 90's and has been a large financial donor of recent ($75,000 this year alone). Given he has contributed so activly and significantly to the Hillary 2016 campaign, there is an obvious conflict of interest here.
17/20 subjects they feature demonize Democrats (specifically President Obama). The other 3/20 they spend on demonizing minority groups. Just watch it for five minutes and you'll see what I mean. Most of it is lies though. They said Obama was letting in thousands of illegal immigrants, when he's deported more illegal immigrants than any other president ever (more than 2 million).
Now, I'm neither a Republican nor a Democrat, so this answer will not be a biased one. There is simply a higher population of Democrats, Republican news is quite biased itself, but the majority news puts in hints that the Republican politicians are having a negative affect on something specific. I won't generalize on everything, but it seems as though the mainstream opinion feeds Democrats, as if it is no longer Democratic, but for everyone.
All news outlets are biased to some degree. The bias goes both ways. Fox news is biased against Democrats in the same way that MSNBC is biased against Republicans. NelsonKnows is completely right in one way - that to keep citizens informed, news outlets should not have bias. However, I disagree with his claim that the media is only biased against Republicans, because it's not. There are outrageous and even racist or sexist claims made by the media and by conservative speakers against Democrats, such as the claims that Obama is Muslim, or he sympathizes with terrorists, or some other random stuff.