Study: Networks Much Tougher On Obama Than McCain

LA Times:

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.

...

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.

Read the whole story: LA Times

Comments

[firewmn]

Yes, the media has been harder on Barack because the media doesn't know how to handle an honest, sincere, gracious, articulate, intelligent family man..

It threw them for a loop as they are for years so accustom to lies, deception, adultry, law-breaking, censoring, typical elitist politican.

[GrainOSand]

Let not The Center for Media and Public Affairs do for you what you can do for yourself concerning the obvious.

There is no need to study the obvious. It would be like studying the wetness of water. Many in the traditional news media are compromised, confused, and threatened by an emerging future that increasingly suggests wholesale transformation. It is no surprise that it is behaving as it is (self protection and self interest) and it is also no surprise that certain segments of the population allow the media to inform them of the world they live in (self annihilation).

Why look inside when someone else can tell you what and how to think? Why open your eyes when blinders are just so warm, fuzzy, and soothing to eyes that do not want to see the obvious? Who needed the Rodney King video to confirm police brutality other than those who refuse to see the world they live in?

FOX News (and others) is a deluxe set of blinders for a large population segment whose eyes want to remain closed. Is it not zombies that are said to walk the earth with eyes closed and with mind impaired or gone?

[Jahmekyah]

Why live in the real world when your reality is so much more comfortable. People in a America are too lazy to think, having someone think for you, no matter how ridiculous their conclusions, is better than thinking....apparently.

[macaframa]

yes because only americans have a mainstream media

[Smirk]

No kidding.

[Bluejay00234]

Well, well what a surpise. NOT!

[joeyp404]

Remember when Hillary raised this issue? What goes around, comes around.

[NYC07]

Just look at how the press treated his speech in Berlin. It was all " Oh he acting so arrogent", Do you think he over played his hand" "His speech was light weight" Instead of saying isn't great to see Europeans cheering an American, instead of burning him in effogy? Isn't great to see Europeans waiving the American Flag instead of spitting on it ? Isn't great that the people we are supposed to be allies with are treating him with respect instead of distain. No instead they repeat the Rights talking points all the while giving McCain a pass on every daily gaffe.

[MaryanneAZ]

I still find it humorous that McCain's own campaign provided the loudest and most robust advertising hype which actually worked to invigorate the media to flock to the Obama international trip in droves. If the McCain and RNC had not been so vocal in its cry for a trip to Iraq/Afghanistan, then perhaps the media's interest would not have been as intense as it turned out to be. The Obama campaign can thank the McCain campaign and RNC for all of the free build-up advertisement they provided for his overseas trip. The RNC countdown clock was particularly helpful to Obama. The more recent ads where the McCain campaign tells outright lies I think will also ultimately benefit Obama. If the Republicans are not willing to tell the truth to the American people about campaign issues, then how can anyone trust them to tell the truth in office? In this 21st century world, I think we've figured out that answer to that question. Obama '08

[DMHendrix]

Even Tom Brokaw had me wanting to throw a brick at the television this morning. Of all the people he picks quotes from to hammer away at Obama and his trip abroad was DAVID BROOKS and CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER...come one man...you haven't been retired that long. You pick two of the most conservative jack-asses to grace the pages of newspapers that no one is reading anymore to throw in the mans face?

They are all jokes! Every last one of them.

[brigadere]

The fact is all of main stream media is owned by large corporations whose bosses look and act much more like McCain than Obama. Therefore they can get away more readily with attacking Obama. This is just another way that large corporations continue to demean and demoralize US minority populations. They only time that they care to hear from them is when they are crafting a new strategy to sell them a violent video game or cd.

[NYC07]

I will believe that the MSM are covering McCain the way the cover Obama when they ask McCain if he thinks all of the gaffes and wrong history that he McCain, has been spouting may be due to his age.

[hydenorhare]

How come the Center for Media and Public Affairs doesn't have this study on their own web site?
I'd like to see the details, wouldn't you?

[leaningIndy]

I have recognized the bias also, so I'm glad a reputable outside group has confirmed my suspicions. To me it appeared that all the on-air personalities (except for a couple) have begun tempering their questions and opinions reqarding Obama because many were being perceived to 'be in the tank for Obama.' Of course, that wasn't true, but no legitimate reporter wants to give that image - thus they have rubber-banded past neutral into negative. And by default McCain benefits. Meanwhile, it seems to be okay to 'be in the tank' for McCain' - no one is complaining there. Of course one is 'in the tank' for McCain by simply ignoring his MANY gaffes and inability to articulate on his feet. But no one wants to pick on the old man for fear of appearing partison.

[loax]

The MSM won't pay any attention to this study. They are totally biases for McCain, Let him slide on every issue while they hammer Obama. This is not balanced journalism, but facism from the far right who own the networks!

[hydenorhare]

Another sample ...
"Some say Ba-rack O-bama cares too much."
Chalk that baby up in the negative column for the O man.

[Dane1911]

Yes, they will still ignore this research...how sad...