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

[Georgianna]

Shocking? I think not.

I've been watching the coverage closely for some time now, and had come to the same conclusion. Glad to have these suspicions verified.

What is the media thinking? Journalists are supposed to report the news not be the news.

[ebanks84]

Ain't that the truth! But by golly, I think they like BEING THE NEWS!

[reliant1]

They seem to be making a big business out of "being the news".

They have air time to sell and have found it's alot easier to sell, if they are the news.

[Wildcatdiva]

facts are facts but there will always be bozos trying to refute them.

[harriscrl3]

I could have told you that I still cant believe that 49% of people say Obama get more positive media coverage. I wonder if these people take it to mean more coverage period I suspect thats the case because there is no way that Obama gets more favorable coverage. Everytime time I turn to one of the networks its Obama is losing this and how can Obama wn this and why isnt Obama reaching this voting block and nothing as far as McCain not being able to reach certain segments of the population.

Carol

[Sabreen60]

No sh*.t Sherlock !!

[ebanks84]

I just love your response :)

[TeMoinPennsylvania]

Thank you, finally some science in the midst of all of this! Now the sad thing is we have to rely on the same biased media to get the news out to America. Or do we?

[ebanks84]

I'm the news in my family! I telephone, email or send smoke signals if I have to, to let everyone I know hear what is REALLY going on behind the scenes that they are not hearing. I suggest we all do the same because the average joe might not hear this little bit of research which is SO TRUE.

[ClevelandTom]

The TV news will beat on the frontrunner and give the other guy a bit of a break.

Over the past 20 years or so, media owners have moved from viewing their news operations as a civic responsibility to demanding they be a profit center. Dramatic news events increase ratings and that translates to higher ad revenues. Therefore, the broadcast media has a vested interest in having a close, dramatic election. Consciously or sub-consciously, their expressed opinions reflect a need to make the race closer more than they reflect a bias to one candidate or another.

[ebanks84]

And that's EXACTLY what is wrong with the OLD POLITICS of Washington. And I'm so glad Obama will do all he can to change that. It doesn't make any sense, it is a*s backwards, and makes for folly only in the political atmosphere.

[Stringer32]

There may be more coverage of Obama, but its far more negative. If Obama had made just one of the many gaffes McCain had made the press would have roasted him for it. The only diffrence is one candidate can deal with it, without resorting to whinning and creating ads about unfair treatment.

[Cedman]

Dah! He has one network devoted to smearing him and CNN was in Hillary's corner. There is a constant "yes, but" analysis to anything positive Obama does as they wait for him to slip. McCain slips and stumbles all over the place and has been getting a pass. The funniest thing I saw this week was FOX which is leading the charge in saying that the media is in love with him. They were doing a segment on this crap while McCain was live n CNN. Suddenly, they switched to cover Obama and never acknowledge their guy McCain. The bottomline is that Obama draws ratings and a close race is also beneficial to their profits.

[Truthfighter1]

hmm...i couldn't tell.

they should keep this studying going, i've been saying for a long time although he gets plenty of coverage, most of it is negative. I think he'd rather not be getting all this coverage, that's why he has become much tougher with the Media.

There trying to break him down and i think he is doing a great job fighting back.

[MariaHopeful]

I wonder if they took into consideration the much used "teaser" questions. Ninety-nine percent of these teaser questions are anti-Obama. Anderson Cooper, Andrea Mitchell, David Gregory, Chris Matthews, Wolf Blitzer, Campbel Brown and David Shusters are using these questions against Obama quite effectively. Instead of telling you that they are going to a break and when they return they will be talking more about the speech Obama gave in Berlin today, they characterize and frame what they will be talking about. "Was Obama presumptuous" they ask. "Was he overstepping the lines?" "Where was the substance?" "Will this turn off voters?" These questions are planting and nurturing seeds of doubt about Obama. I hope someone who is more of an expert than I am will do a study of this tactic being used against Obama by the media.

[Welfred]

It makes since since the media spends most of it's time reporting what comes out of each candidates camp and that McCain's camp has been very negative. I am surprised the numbers are not even worse.

[nerakami]

There comes a time when the public needs to make a stand as this deliberate attempt to "brainwash" Americans into who to vote for is highly destructive. The self interest push by these media conglomerates is absolutely outrageous and highly devastating for the democratic process.

[bosshogg]

this was a no sh*t study.....­..........­..........­.......

[ebanks84]

I don't think so because the media aren't listening to us, the people! So I guess if a University has gone through the trouble of analyzing this tremendous new found knowledge, they might listen to them, don't you think? Since they love polls, surveys, and other dumb stuff to prove their outlandish talking points!

[DanniD]

I didn't need any researchers to tell me that because I already knew it but I'm so glad they did the research that proves it to the skeptics!

[UnbiasView]

If you get all the media coverage then you shouldn't complain about the "tough" part of it because you need to take the good with the bad. In addition, Obama is the new guy so people still don't know who he is or what he stands for because his record really isn't built up.