[lit-ideas] Re: Study: Media coverage has favored Obama campaign
- From: "Julie Krueger" <juliereneb@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sat, 1 Nov 2008 06:05:48 -0600
Two things:
Let's do a hypothetical -- let's pretend Candidate A has just saved a child
from a burning inferno and Candidate B has just been caught on videotape
beating a child senseless. If Broadcast TV reports the existence of these
two events, is the media biased because its reporting of Candidate B is
"negative"?
If the Broadcast news has limited means (staff, time) to investigate the two
events, it is not hard to see how complications could be uncovered in each
event as witnesses are interviewed, events leading up to the events are
learned, details come to light (A helped set the fire; B was beating flames
out on the kid which weren't picked up by the camera), forensics are done,
etc. If the news channel had unlimited means, each "event" could be covered
in exquisite detail.
Another hypothetical -- Candidate A has just made a stop at KFC. Candidate
B has just made a stop at McD's. (insert here everything from the above
paragraph)
Choosing which details to follow and which to report surely does require
judgement calls -- but on the surface of things, but if there are two
headlines -- "Candidate saves child" & "Candidate beats child" and the news
outlet only has that information to report, does that mean the report is
biased?
One other note. It does seem to me that media time is part of the
perception of media bias. And the McCain/Palin campaign has not allowed
anything near the openness and availability to the press that the
Obama/Biden campaign has. That doesn't make the M/P ticket bad. It does,
however, mitigate to some extent against the charge of heavily unbalanced
media time.
On Sat, Nov 1, 2008 at 4:45 AM, Simon Ward <sedward@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Having just trawled over Slate's declaration for Obama in terms of who
> people would vote for http://www.slate.com/id/2203151 I'm not going to
> contest the notion that there is a liberal bias amongst journos (probably
> made all the more obvious given the choice available). To balance that out,
> it's worth noting that just about every media outlet in the US is owned by
> big interests who probably wouldn't want to see a Socialist elected as
> President. Which probably explains why they are letting their employees
> express their preference so readily.
>
> The tally of voters for Obama inside the Slate offices was as follows:
>
> Barack Obama: 55
> John McCain: 1
> Bob Barr: 1
> Not McCain: 1
> Noncitizen, can't vote: 4
>
> Those 55 include 'Hitch' who has now, I believe, gone so far as to denounce
> Chalabi and accept that the debacle in Iraq has been a debacle.
>
> And I do hope nothing untoward has happened to Lawrence. Perhaps he'll
> return once it's all over and get right back to his long-standing
> endorsement of Obama.
>
> Simon
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Eric Yost" <mr.eric.yost@xxxxxxxxx>
> To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Saturday, November 01, 2008 9:10 AM
> Subject: [lit-ideas] Study: Media coverage has favored Obama campaign
>
>
>
> Earlier, Simon had asked for evidence of media bias, so I've appended the
>> latest below. For the record, I have no preference either way in the
>> Presidential race and would be perfectly OK with either Prez O or Prez M.
>>
>> _____
>>
>> NEW YORK (AP) - John McCain supporters who believe they haven't gotten a
>> fair shake from the media during the Republican's candidacy against Barack
>> Obama have a new study to point to.
>>
>> Comments made by sources, voters, reporters and anchors that aired on ABC,
>> CBS and NBC evening newscasts over the past two months reflected positively
>> on Obama in 65 percent of cases, compared to 31 percent of cases with
>> regards to McCain, according to the Center for Media and Public Affairs.
>>
>> ABC's "World News" had more balance than NBC's "Nightly News" or the "CBS
>> Evening News," the group said.
>>
>> Meanwhile, the first half of Fox News Channel's "Special Report" with Brit
>> Hume showed more balance than any of the network broadcasters, although it
>> was dominated by negative evaluations of both campaigns. The center didn't
>> evaluate programs on CNN or MSNBC.
>>
>> "For whatever reason, the media are portraying Barack Obama as a better
>> choice for president than John McCain," said Robert Lichter, a George Mason
>> University professor and head of the center. "If you watch the evening news,
>> you'd think you should vote for Obama."
>>
>> The center analyzed 979 separate news stories shown between Aug. 23 and
>> Oct. 24, and excluded evaluations based on the campaign horse race,
>> including mention of how the candidates were doing in polls. For instance,
>> when a voter was interviewed on CBS Oct. 14 saying he thought Obama brought
>> a freshness to Washington, that was chalked up as a pro-Obama comment.
>>
>> When NBC's Andrea Mitchell reported Oct. 1 that some conservatives say
>> that Sarah Palin is not ready for prime-time, that's marked in the negative
>> column for McCain.
>>
>> ABC recorded 57 percent favorable comments toward the Democrats, and 42
>> percent positive for the Republicans. NBC had 56 percent positive for the
>> Democrats, 16 percent for the Republicans. CBS had 73 percent positive
>> (Obama), versus 31 percent (McCain).
>>
>> Hume's telecast had 39 percent favorable comments for McCain and 28
>> percent positive for the Democratic ticket.
>>
>> It was the *second* study in two weeks to remark upon negative coverage
>> for the McCain-Palin ticket. The Project for Excellence in Journalism
>> concluded last week that McCain's coverage has been overwhelmingly negative
>> since the conventions ended, while Obama's has been more mixed.
>>
>> Meanwhile, another survey issued Friday by the Pew Research Center for the
>> People & the Press showed that television continues to be Americans' main
>> source for campaign news, particularly the cable news networks.
>>
>> from
>> http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D945SHBG1&show_article=1
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
>> digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
>>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
> digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
>
--
Julie Krueger
Other related posts:
