Here is a great and well linked article on Yahoo that does a great job of explaining and documenting the MSM's bias in favor of John McCain. In particular, she notes how the MSM refused to report anything that does not fit with John McCain's foreign policy "expertise" whereas Obama would crucified if he made the gaffes that for McCain have become routine.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/huffpost/20080722/cm_huffpost/114086/snip
Back in March, Glenn Greenwald wrote a piece on Salon.com that expertly described the special treatment the press accords McCain, and how liberal pundits are just as likely to drink the McCain Kool-Aid. Greenwald concentrates on the idea that it is taken as a given that McCain is a foreign policy expert, so his gaffes are ignored. He writes:
"Reporters have already decided that John McCain is a Serious, Knowledgeable Foreign Policy Expert -- and an honorable, truth-telling gentleman -- and therefore there is no reason to tell voters about evidence that demonstrates that he's anything but that. Evidence that reflects poorly on McCain's foreign policy seriousness or character is actually suppressed or concealed because they think it can't be newsworthy, because such evidence just can't be true, by definition."
Greenwald goes on to note that "reporters who have long covered McCain themselves constantly admit that they accord McCain special, favorable treatment and don't even realize the deep corruption they're acknowledging." He cites Ana Marie Cox of Time saying on CNN:
"I think what happens is that you -- if you've been covering him for a long time, there's a sense that, well, he does that all the time, it's not worth reporting, because he does -- he's a cranky old man. I mean, to be quite frank <...> And also, we wrote it off to, like, you know, he hadn't had his fifth cup of Starbucks today."
/snip