As media scrutiny of Ben Carson rises, so do campaign donations. Why?

A Gallup poll shows fewer than a third of Republicans trust the media, and Ben Carson is reaping the benefits. 

AP Photo/Alan Diaz
In this Nov. 6, 2015, file photo, Republican presidential candidate Ben Carson speaks during a news conference before attending a Black Republican Caucus of South Florida event benefiting the group's scholarship fund in Palm Beach Gardens, Fla. The retired neurosurgeon said on several Sunday, Nov. 8, talk shows that he’s being scrutinized more closely than any other presidential candidate. (AP Photo/Alan Diaz, File)

For the past week, GOP presidential hopeful Ben Carson has faced what might be the most intense media scrutiny of his life – while raking in huge sums of donations.

Dr. Carson's campaign faced challenges over the candidate's stories about his adolescence. On Thursday, Politico published an article asserting that Carson "fabricated" a story about refusing a full scholarship to the United States Military Academy. After criticism from the campaign, the article was updated, but still contended that Carson was not offered admission nor a scholarship to West Point, as he has said in the past.

A day earlier, Buzzfeed uncovered footage of a speech Carson gave in 1998 where he said he believed that the biblical figure Joseph built the pyramids in Egypt to store grain and avoid an impending famine. That story from the Old Testament takes places during the Middle Kingdom of ancient Egypt, five centuries after the Pyramids of Giza were built.  

And on Thursday, CNN reporting cast doubt on a incident described in Carson's 1990 autobiography in which Carson attempted to stab another young man, only to have the knife blade deflected and broken by a belt buckle. The story is meant to illustrate the candidate's transformation from an angry young man to a self-made world-class surgeon. 

“I would say to the people of America: Do you think I’m a pathological liar like CNN does? Or do you think I’m an honest person?” Carson asked on Fox News's "The Kelly File."

On Saturday, Carson posted a tweet thanking “biased media” for helping him raise $3.5 million.

The Christian Science Monitor’s Peter Grier reported on the potential fallout from Carson’s misstatements about West Point. Grier posed the question: What if the media is making a big deal out of nothing?

Look at this from the point of view of a committed Carson supporter: The West Point thing is just nit picking. Carson has always said he turned down the opportunity to go the US Military Academy. And the CNN stuff is kind of backward. The ex-surgeon’s credibility is in trouble because he may have been a more well-behaved teen than he’s led the world to believe? Is that really going to cost him votes?

Carson’s strategy in handling tough criticism has been to disavow the mainstream media and claim bias, and that likely resonates with his supporters. Liberal media bias has long been a talking point among conservative politicians. A recent gallup poll showed fewer than a third of Republicans trust the media, while more than half of Democrats do.

The Washington Post’s David Weigal examined Republicans' frustrations with the press, arguing that many see a different agenda in perceived takedown stories based on the candidate’s party affiliation:

It doesn't matter that ABC News broke the Jeremiah Wright story or that Politico broke the Bill Ayers story. Because those stories were not piled on Obama — or because he was able to break free of them — they are proof that the media went easy and allowed him to become president … The assumption that the media vets Democrats only as a way to clear them runs as deep as the assumption that it vets Republicans to destroy them.

While appearing on MSNBC’s "Morning Joe" on Monday, Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee warned Carson that the scrutiny will likely intensify.

“I’m thinking, ‘pal, you ain’t seen nothing yet,’” Huckabee said about Carson. "They have not yet come after your kids and the rest of your family – they will.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.