I used to think the press was "liberal" but I don't think so anymore. These are people who would sell their own souls and their children just to scoop each other. It's all about sensationalism. Reporting on topics that are "liberal" causes controversy which creates a story. I really don't think they care enough about anything to promote an agenda. It's all about ratings and getting the story first.
Obama was a hot topic because he was the dark horse candidate--he was a greenhorn senator, the youngest candidate, left of center, and a black man. When this guy started getting the voters' attention, by virtue of his underdog status, he suddenly became "the story" to report. Obama went from being the "awe, how cute--he's running for president against the big dogs" story to the "holy crap, this guy really could win" story.
No matter what your political affiliation is, you have to admit that Obama's campaign and his victory are as remarkable as well as historic. Even if he ends up being the Calvin Coolidge or Andrew Johnson of this century, his election is already manifesting itself as a great healing to the wounds of racism in the United States. That alone is something MLK and his disciples could not do.
If the economy were in good shape, the wars were going well, and unemployment were low, I doubt as many Americans would have voted for the change Obama promised on the stump--if it ain't broke, don't fix it, right? Perhaps the Democrats do owe the victory to the media for reporting on the unraveling of those during Bush's tenure in the Oval Office.