[nopriorarrests]

Yes, it's funny. Titles for two articles, both are easy to google:

1. How Obama’s Team Used Big Data to Rally Voters (MIT Technology Review, 2012)

2. How Trump Consultants Exploited the Facebook Data of Millions (NYT, 2018)

No bias here.

[Retra]

The bias there is largely do to the differences in behaviors and histories of the parties involved. It's one thing for a charity group to run a donation center, and a wholly different thing for a life-long con artist to do it.

It is a rationally induced bias.

[briandear]

You're saying that it's ok for the media to attempt to influence people if you happen to agree with the message?

[Retra]

If I wanted to say that, I would have. The situation today is very different from when Obama campaigned. For one, the FBI & CIA didn't announce that Russians interfered during Obama's campaign. So it's really no mystery that people are paying attention to what the Trump campaign is doing.

And that's ignoring the fact that Cambridge Analytica was apparently breaking laws.

Either way, it is ok for the media to 'influence people'. If you're going to be vague, then we may as well say that is their whole reason for being. And if I wanted them to advocate one message over another, what difference is it to you? That's politics.