Sentiment Extraction from Libya Response
Social media and online mediums spiked and at times surpassed the amount of television coverage surrounding the attacks in Libya, the political response and how the official statements from both parties fared with viewers, readers and commentators. Broadcast, social media and online channels focused on several key elements to the attacks: historical elements, geographic elements, the events and political responses. Unfortunately, the details of the event were overshadowed by reactions to the sympathetic White House response, the untimely political opportunity taken by Mitt Romney, Romney’s infamous smirk, and backlash from both Democrats and Republicans. AllMedia has pulled and analyzed all of these entities, and we’ll examine each per monitored media source. Noticeably, there were no measurable media connections between the candidates and Ambassador Stevens within the past 24 hours.
Negative sentiment over broadcast shifted towards the White House and the overall tone of the premeditation carried out in the Libya attacks, combined with the release of a movie trailer with anti-Islamic messaging. Many reporters called upon Jimmy Carter’s lost presidency in 1980 to Reagan, and linked the Libya crisis Carter faced during his Presidency. Over broadcast, Romney held neutral tones, while the coverage over protests in Cairo fared more positive, without the elements of a premeditated strike.
On Television, Romney was strongly critized across a number of publications, even by fellow Republicans. The following pro-Republican excerpts rebuking Romney were pulled from broadcast sources:
The Wall Street Journal’s Peggy Noonan said on Fox News that Romney “has not been doing himself any favours … I always think discretion is the better way to go.”
Online, Romney was strongly critized across a number of publications, even by fellow Republicans. The following pro-Republican excerpts rebuking Romney were pulled from several online media sources:
Romney’s “rush to condemn Obama” was “as tortured in its reasoning as it is unseemly in its timing,” said Mark Salter, a longtime aide to Arizona Sen. John McCain, the party’s presidential nominee in 2008.
Peter King, the Republican chairman of the House of Representatives’ committee on homeland security, said Romney was “right on the larger point,” but added: “I probably would have waited a day or half a day.”
Bill Kristol, editor of the conservative Weekly Standard, said Romney’s “timing and tone” were questionable.
Ed Rogers, a longtime Republican strategist, penned an opinion piece on the Washington Post’s website that maligned Romney’s response: ”At this solemn, serious moment, Mitt Romney had to be crisp and precise. He was neither,” he wrote.
“At times, Romney jumbled his words and appeared to be winging it. The president had to display stature and resolve. He did both …. I’m stunned that Romney didn’t take more time to have a clear, well-delivered statement regarding our ambassador’s murder in Libya.”
Granted anonymity, Republican critics were far more brutal, with one describing the presidential nominee as “not ready for prime time” in a Buzzfeed piece.
A former George W. Bush State Department official was also quoted as saying: “It wasn’t presidential of Romney to go political immediately — a tragedy of this magnitude should be something the nation collectively grieves before politics enters the conversation.”
On social media, “Disgraceful, Obama’s 1st response symphatises with attackers” showed slight negatives. The most powerful negative social media comments came across to Romney, with the positive statemetns supporting Obama and his tact. In fact, Romney saw huge negative spikes through the day yesterday and into the evening.
Both sides took to the blogs to respond in turn to responses to the attacks. Both President Obama and Mitt Romney saw negative sentiment in conjunction with comments about Libya. Many blogs took action against Mitt Romney’s “smirK” following his untimely press conferences. Republican blogs attacked President Obama’s “sympathetic response” to Libya.
Egypt, Libya, Cairo, Iran, Bush, and the White House took negative comments across the Forums. Mitt Romney found neutral sentiment, while President Obama remained positive.
We’ll continue to investigate the existing Romney campaign strategy, and why it is drawing sharp criticism from both Democrats and Republicans, as a Romney adviser told CBS News on Wednesday night that it’s all part of Romney’s intention to draw sharp contrasts between him and Obama. The latest actions show that the only contrast is between the behavior of President of the United States of America and a man with ambitious, yet desperate desires to be.