Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This is a great article describing a recent 6-week study regarding network coverage of the candidates. Although Republicans constantly decry the television media for giving much more coverage to Obama, the study's findings suggest that the overwhelming majority of opinion-related coverage has been NEGATIVE toward Obama, NOT positive.
Quote:
Haters of the mainstream media reheated a bit of conventional wisdom last week. Barack Obama, they said, was getting a free ride from those insufferable liberals.
Such pronouncements, sorry to say, tend to be wrong since they describe a monolithic media that no longer exists. Information today cascades from countless outlets and channels, from the Huffington Post to Politico.com to CBS News and beyond.
But now there's additional evidence that casts doubt on the bias claims aimed -- with particular venom -- at three broadcast networks.
The Center for Media and Public Affairs at George Mason University, where researchers have tracked network news content for two decades, found that ABC, NBC and CBS were tougher on Obama than on Republican John McCain during the first six weeks of the general-election campaign.
You read it right: tougher on the Democrat.
During the evening news, the majority of statements from reporters and anchors on all three networks are neutral, the center found. And when network news people ventured opinions in recent weeks, 28% of the statements were positive for Obama and 72% negative.
Network reporting also tilted against McCain, but far less dramatically, with 43% of the statements positive and 57% negative, according to the Washington-based media center.
...
"This information should blow away this silly assumption that more coverage is always better coverage," he said.
...
By the way, Lichter's group also surveys the first half-hour of "Special Report With Brit Hume," Fox News' answer to the network evening news shows.
The review found that, since the start of the general-election campaign, "Special Report" offered more opinions on the two candidates than all three networks combined.
No surprise there. Previous research has shown Fox News to be opinion-heavy.
"Special Report" was tougher than the networks on Obama -- with 79% of the statements about the Democrat negative, compared with 61% negative on McCain.
There's plenty of room for questioning the networks' performance and watching closely for symptoms of Obamamania.
But could we at least remain focused on what ABC, NBC and CBS actually put on the air, rather than illusions that their critics create to puff themselves up?
So, turns out the "liberally-biased media" that some posters on this forum are constantly whining about aren't giving Obama better coverage than McCain, after all. How 'bout that.
This is a great article describing a recent 6-week study regarding network coverage of the candidates. Although Republicans constantly decry the television media for giving much more coverage to Obama, the study's findings suggest that the overwhelming majority of opinion-related coverage has been NEGATIVE toward Obama, NOT positive.
So, turns out the "liberally-biased media" that some posters on this forum are constantly whining about aren't giving Obama better coverage than McCain, after all. How 'bout that.
Are you smoking crack or something?!?! Or maybe you are just kidding here?? The media is so for Obama that is shocking.
1. The LA Times is an extremely biased news agency. How can you trust them in the first place?!?! The LA Times was known as one of the 3 major the newspaper news wings of the Democratic Party (the NY Times is the #1).
Liberals outnumber conservatives 19 to 1 in terms of reporter's political views and political contributions. Known fact.
the media never favored oba,a they only favored him during all that negative baggage.
so who are these [people complaining whenthey couldntget enough of the rev.wright situation? i'd like to know, fox gave b.o more press than mccain so whos too blame.
liberal media my ass, and mccain is a liberal as well
Are you smoking crack or something?!?! Or maybe you are just kidding here?? The media is so for Obama that is shocking.
1. The LA Times is an extremely biased news agency. How can you trust them in the first place?!?! The LA Times was known as one of the 3 major the newspaper news wings of the Democratic Party (the NY Times is the #1).
Liberals outnumber conservatives 19 to 1 in terms of reporter's political views and political contributions. Known fact.
The Wall Street Journal today didn't give a very positive portrayal of Obama. Maybe they are trying to back pedal now that they realize the mistake they made earlier on.
I think the MEDIA may have shot themselves in the foot by ignoring the obvious popularity of Ron Paul. They turned off a lot of people who just wanted an honest portrayal of what was going on in the elections no matter whether they were a Ron Paul supporter or not. They've lost a LOT of readers and viewers and listeners. Ya wouldn't think the media couldn't have been so stupid and arrogant as to think that people were just going to take everything they said about the elections as Gospel after trying a stunt like that. Americans are dumb but they aren't
THAT dumb. Furthermore most of them have computers and can find out what is really going on on the internet. I think they are FINALLY getting this.
They have learned or are learning their lesson which is why they are now trying to make accessing the internet more difficult and expensive.But this won't happen until 2012. Visit www.savetheinternet.com for more on that "happy" news.
Honestly, being impartial to Obama or McCain because I hate them both equally (okay, maybe I hate McCain just a bit more)... I have to say that the media has not been impartial, with more coverage for Obama and mostly positive attitudes for Obama but then I am in a "swing" state... I do notice that when they talk about McCain, its mainly about him criticizing Obama and whenever they mention McCain, they will also mention Obama several times... however when they do mention Obama, they do (but rarely) mention McCain... I am not saying its a conspiracy... but it is pretty clear that the media tends to favor Obama more...
Edit: I should also say that the media has always been bias towards a candidate so it doesn't surprise me one bit that they favor Obama. However, McCain should not complain since the media "gave" him more coverage during for republican race... Honestly, I do think reform is needed to give every candidate equal time on TV as well as an equal amount of money to spend on the campaign and limiting "soft money"... but that is another story...
Last edited by evilnewbie; 07-28-2008 at 05:33 PM..
I just heard he was one of the True Conservatives in Congress. Which is it?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Or maybe you are just kidding here?? The media is so for Obama that is shocking. 
The LA Times was known as one of the 3 major the newspaper news wings of the Democratic Party (the NY Times is the #1). 
