If Al Gore, also a failed presidential candidate, would have come to Goucher College, do you think there would be coverage?

Let me guess the response: "But he's bringing the message of global warming!". Well, Dr. Paul is bring the message of economic disaster, which, to me at least, is a hell of a lot more pressing than Gore's message. How can I buy a Prius if I have no money?

To be fair, the Sun did have some coverage on their daily tabloid site here.

And news space a premium? Nothing but a cop out.

DR: Well, when Ron wins the Nobel -- or gets more than 6 percent of the vote here, or serves as vice-president for two terms -- give us a call.

That's some responsible journalism, DR. A congressman, who's grassroots movement and political fundraising netted him more money than the leading candidates for a presidential campaign, deserves no coverage? You aren't curious about why people shelled out so much for his presidential bid? Why his message mobilized such a large chunk of young voters?

Perhaps a more suitable analogy would be if Howard Dean showed up after his '04 run. I bet the Sun would have been chomping at the bit to get into Goucher.

DR: Sure, I'm curious. I'm just explaining the dynamics of the news biz and why, on a particular night, this particular failed fringe candidate might not have received any coverage locally. And the point about shrinking news hole, and reporters to cover all events, is real. Folks need to start buying The Sun, or paying for on-line service, or it's only going to get worse.

I really hate to agree with anything that The Sun does, but why on Earth WOULD the Sun cover something like this? A congressman whose presidential bid failed visited a local college. Big deal. It's a complete non-story. People who think this is a newsworthy story need to get a clue.

Hmmm. Or perhaps folks should just start getting their news from a different source. One that we trust to share the unbiased truth, as parsed and exposed and investigated by others, where space isn't at a premium so you can read about all the different viewpoints and options and make up your own mind.

Hmmm. Now where would I find a place like that. Oh yeah - not the Baltimore Sun or any other traditional media source. How about the great equalizer? The information source that contributed greatly to bringing down communism. It's called the Internet! Which is where people who care already go to learn and make their decisions.

But that's also why a candidate like Ron Paul whose popularity (or lack of) is based on rational thought rather than glitz, photo opps, one-liners, and blips on the nightly news will not succeed as long as the majority of the people still use those "traditional" sources for their information.

That's where we are today. But will it be different in 4 more years? Will the country finally wake up and stop making the "leader of the free world" a high school popularity contest? If not, I fear for the future of the great American experiment.

DR: Right. Trust in the blogosphere.

when someone gets no media converage, but has a devout following, and still gets 10% of the vote and beats out 'front-runners', why not give him some converage. i just don't think many people know who he is. not even republicans like john mccain.

DR: Paul got about 6 percent of the vote in Maryland. There was coverage of him before the primaries. The mainstream press did not ignore him.

Yeah, how about Larry King’s interview with Dr. Paul the night before Iowa Caucus never getting aired? How about Dr. Paul’s interview with John Stossl for 20/20, never aired? Who was behind his ban from the debate in NH the weekend before the primaries there…these guys in the media don't care about what really matters to people. It's a damn shame.

The mainstream press did not ignore him.

Of coarse they did and it is well documented.

Ron Paul received almost 0 coverage since before IOWA. There is even college professors who are using the media bias against Paul to teach their students about media censorship

Space a premium...? Oh, gag me with a spoon. The media has plenty of room to cover the latest faux pas of Obama over and over and over and over and over again. There is obviously no shortage of space -- just a shortage of desire to cover actual news.

DR: Please. Obama is a leading candidate for the presidential nomination. Paul is finished this time around. You can play editor, but you're not very good at it.

I continue discovering around the country journalists like here making editorial coverage discussions based on perceived information. Among many positives, Ron Paul offers outside his message are accomplishments in the Republican Primary. McCain has about 850 bound national delegates, while Ron Paul has about 650. The media, like appears here, has decided what is news. The national news is obligated to cover every candidate. Just look at political coverage on CNN, NBC, CBS, ABC, Fox news and on the list go who are not even listing Ron Paul as a candidate, let alone cover his active, current campaign.

Even more so, when an active presidential candidate visits a local community the media red carpet is obligated to extend coverage. Fulfilling the journalist oath and corporate governance code of ethics.

The Baltimore Sun is historically significant primarily for only a single reason -- H.L. Mencken. Mencken was also a curmudgeonly libertarian similar to Ron Paul, so there should be a natural affinity. Alas, the Sun has forsaken its heritage, indeed at times it appears ashamed of it. Paul, like Mencken, will likely remain a figure of historical import regardless of the Sun's support.

DR, you're missing the story here... How do you explain an overflowing audience showing up on a Monday night to see a failed candidate. At Penn State, 2000 people showed up last Friday (in the rain). This is unusual...

Posted by: Steve- "People who think this is a newsworthy story need to get a clue."

Well steve let me give you a little heads up. Dr. Ron Paul understands what ails our economy and our civil liberties. Two things that if this country loses, we will have no country or constitution. Ron Paul is talking about "the story of the century" to this nation everywhere he goes, and any news media outlet that doesn't recognize this simple fact, does not deserve the attention of the public!

Tell us DR, would Obama be a leading candidate if the media refused to cover his candidacy and had the hubris to ban him from the debates...?

What if they gave him just a little coverage, always accompanied by the comment that he was unelectable...?

This is truly negligent reporting of significant news. There are millions of us out here that can get enough of what Ron Paul has to say. He is the only true leader out there that speaks his mind and backs up what he says with his actions. He is the only presidential candidate worthy of a vote and you news people just blindly ignore him. I would think it would be your duty, as an american citizen, and news reporter, to keep the general public informed of significant presidential candidates. On the other hand maybe you have a different agenda than just reporting on news worthy events. I just hope news people aren't trying to influence the outcome of an important election, due to their bias toward some favorite. It sure looks that way from here.
Ron Paul will still get elected. You can't hide the truth. Almost everyone that has heard Ron Paul loves what he has to say. I guess there are a few of us out there that don't want to see the truth, but most of them won't count come election time.

The LAW of MEDIA:

If mentioning Dr. Paul, then one must use the terms "Unelectable, Long Shot, Kook, No-Chance-of-Winning, etc."

When at all possible interrupt or do not air a previously recorded interview with Dr. Paul in favor of a celebrity issue or breaking news ie "Broken Fire Hydrant Makes Fountain"

If interviewing Dr. Paul ask questions that have nothing to do with anything. Ask about his "controversial" opinion on the civil war. Call him crazy if he actually cites various sources while citing none of your own. Never, EVER ask a pertinent question, and always use a condescending attitude.

Discredit your own polls or remove them from public view is Dr. Paul is winning. Even better, exclude Dr. Paul from all polls.

Lie, because no one will ever check your facts.

Did I miss anything guys?

OMG, Dan, you are going to have to step up to the plate (and bring your A game) because the great unwashed masses are really making you look bad here. If snide come-backs and lame excuses are the best you can do, you need to go back to parking cars.

DR: I've run out of time for argument with people who are firm in their support for a loser candidate and still insist that we give him as much attention as we give the presumptive GOP winner (McCain) and the battling Democrats. Have fun posting ad hominen attacks. I'm done.

To suggest that Dr. Paul does not merit some attention simply because he is no longer a candidate for the presidency seems to me misguided. Does his failure to gain the nomination, regardless of the reason(s) for that failure, preclude him from having insight into the current state of our country, its looming problems, and possible paths toward improvement?

I have no desire to “play editor”, as I’m certain I, too, would not be very good at it. But to continue to insist that Dr. Paul should be ignored, wholly on the basis of his failed attempt to gain the nomination (I’ll not even raise the question of blame for that failure), seems contrary to what the philosophy of any objective media organization ought to be.

Why would we exspect the media to start give the peoples champ (ron paul ) coverage now? When did they ever give him any coverage to begin with ? Not like its thier job ? When dirt comes out on mccain, RON PAUL will be last man standing and still can win republican nomination!!!!!!!! THE FACTS ARE RON PAUL HAS NOT GIVEN UP YET. THE MEDIA NEEDS TO GET A CLUE!!!!!! SEND ALL BIAS MEDIA WHORES TO GITMO FOR WATER BOARDING THEN OFF TO IRAN, SINCE THIER TREASONOUS ACTS OF UNDER REPORTING THE TRUTH WILL LEAD US TO NEXT WAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Ron Paul is still newsworthy. His followers are literally taking over the GOP in several states from the ground up.

Ron Paul is a chalkboard libertarian crank.

He revels in knowing that his theories will never be proven wrong because no system of government in the world would implement them fully.

There is the theoretical world of the economist, then there is the real world.

Which one do you think Mr. Paul belongs in?

The ironic problem with Mr. Paul and his ilk is that they have been singing the same tune for the better part of 30 years.

Oddly enough they have not adapted to the market to make their brand of logic more accessable to the mainstream of American society.

Until they do that Paul and his kind will always be on the periphery complaining that no one listens to them.

Perhaps he could write a newsletter about that - oh no wait, he already DID that.

College Libertarianism, your new college Socialism.