My Substitute Reality -You're just jealous cause the little voices only talk to me-

Friday October 31, 2008

Fair and Balanced?

Filed under: Politics — don @ 8:33 am

We keep going back and forth about whether the media is liberal or not. I hope this little study by the Pew Reserch Center helps.

6 Comments

  1. Interesting. A couple of notes to consider while interpreting the results:

    According to Pew, “The most positive stories about [Obama] were those that were most political — focused on polling, the electoral map and tactics.” In other words, they call media coverage of Obama “positive” if it states that he is leading in the polls. That counts for a lot of the news right now. Media coverage is “positive” if they mention that Obama has raised more money, or has more volunteers canvassing a neighborhood.

    Pew then asks, “Is there some element in these numbers that reflects a rooting by journalists for Obama and against McCain, unconscious or otherwise? The data do not provide conclusive answers. They do offer a strong suggestion that winning in politics begets winning coverage”

    They go on to say, “Obama’s coverage was negative in tone when he was dropping in the polls, and became positive when he began to rise, and it was just so for McCain as well. Nor are these numbers different than those we have seen before. Obama’s numbers are similar to what we saw for John Kerry four years ago as he began rising in the polls, and McCain’s numbers are almost identical to those recorded eight years ago for Democrat Al Gore.”

    So the media may be liberal, but this study doesn’t say that.

    :p

    Comment by Daryl — Friday October 31, 2008 @ 11:01 am

  2. Well actually if you go a little deeper than either of us linked, yes it does. “In that sense, the data show, Obama was the beneficiary of the tactical, strategic bias of the press.”

    I’m not sure what the term “tactical, strategic bias of the press” means to you but to me it means they favor someone and in this case it is Obama.

    Comment by Don — Friday October 31, 2008 @ 11:12 am

  3. 😛

    Comment by Don — Friday October 31, 2008 @ 11:13 am

  4. The full quote:

    “In short, the financial crisis and particularly Obama’s steadier reaction to it in relation to McCain’s were clearly a turning point in the media coverage. That more positive coverage was then reflected in the polls, which in turn were reinforced in the horse race coverage that played off those polls. In that sense, the data show, Obama was the beneficiary of the tactical, strategic bias of the press.”

    Sounds like they favored him because he was doing a better job.

    Comment by Daryl — Friday October 31, 2008 @ 4:28 pm

  5. I’ll say this again because apparently you didn’t read it.

    I’m not sure what the term “tactical, strategic bias of the press” means to you but to me it means they favor someone and in this case it is Obama.

    Comment by Don — Friday October 31, 2008 @ 5:56 pm

  6. Right, in that sense. In the sense that the front-runner generally gets more positive press coverage, just as McCain did after the Republican convention, as Bush did in 2000.

    Comment by Daryl — Sunday November 2, 2008 @ 9:49 am

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Powered by WordPress