Is big media purposely keeping Ron Paul's name out of the headlines, actually out of print period?

As a business person I rely on The Wall Street Journal to provide me with a lot of crucial information. This evening I received an email stating: "Thompson's departure leaves behind a still-crowded Republican field, with John McCain, Mitt Romney, Rudy Giuliani and Mike Huckabee battling for the lead in Florida ahead of that state's Jan. 29 primary." So, because you word it "battling for the lead", you are able to omit Ron Paul's name? Or would one more name be too long for print? What ever the reason it just makes me ask the next question: What else is too long for print? Is it ethical to report in this manner? Isn't the fact that he raised 1.85 million dollars on monday news worthy? They mention Giuliani while Ron Paul has more delegates than Rudy. Or was I just too niave to think that America was democratic?