Study Suggests Media Favored Kerry in First Two Weeks of October
Thread Starter
VIP Member
iTrader: (14)
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 8,675
From: Wherever Sucks the Most
Car Info: 2003 WRX, 2008 Camry
Study Suggests Media Favored Kerry in First Two Weeks of October
This tells me that the media is biased and will give more coverage to the candidate they want to win. It also suggests that maybe media coverage this late in the game may have a correlation to the winner like it could have in 2000.
http://www.editorandpublisher.com/ea..._id=1000685127
http://www.editorandpublisher.com/ea..._id=1000685127
NEW YORK A new study for the non-partisan Project for Excellence in Journalism suggests that in the first two weeks of October, during the period of the presidential debates, President Bush received much more unfavorable coverage from some media than Sen. John Kerry.
In the limited sample (which included four newspapers, two cable news programs, and seven shows on broadcast networks), more than half of all Bush stories were negative in tone during this period. One-quarter of all Kerry stories were negative, according to the study.
"This is the mirror image of what happened four years ago," the report states, when Bush benefited from coverage in the same debate period, enjoying twice as many positive stories as Al Gore.
In the limited sample (which included four newspapers, two cable news programs, and seven shows on broadcast networks), more than half of all Bush stories were negative in tone during this period. One-quarter of all Kerry stories were negative, according to the study.
"This is the mirror image of what happened four years ago," the report states, when Bush benefited from coverage in the same debate period, enjoying twice as many positive stories as Al Gore.
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 1,556
From: Austin, TX
You also forget Salty that Iraq is not doing so well right now and that a lot of negative things have come out against Jr. before the election. Also the fact that Jr. got creamed during the presidential debates also would suggest more negative media towards him. So it would make sense that he wouldn't do so well afterwards just like Al Gore.
250,000-mile Club President
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 4,770
From: Bizerkeley
Car Info: MBP 02 WRX wagon
Maybe the "media" is just getting tired of the BS they have to put up with in dealing with the administration, I get the impression that Kerry seems a lot more aproachable and open to the press, compared to Bush's schedule of rallies filled with loyalty-oath-signing crowds of adoring nincompoops.
VIP Member
iTrader: (9)
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 3,709
From: Walnut Creek, CA
Car Info: CRZ EX-Navi/6MT & Vue Redline
I'm with unregistered on this one. Quite a few potentially negative things have come to light recently regarding Iraq, the debates, job losses, etc. Since Bush is closely tied to all of these, of coarse they will be more negative press regarding Bush.
-Chris
-Chris
Dirty Redhead
iTrader: (10)
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 7,204
From: Commuting? I don't know what that means anymore.
Car Info: 05 WRX Wagon (Crystal Gray)
This raises the question of how much the results have to do simply with one candidate doing especially well in the debates, plus the liabilities of the incumbent, who receives negative coverage not just for performance on the stump but also for the policies of his administration.
The story contradicts itself by saying that it's because the media is biast but also because Bush did poorly in the debates just like Al Gore did in 2000.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Salty
Teh Politics Forum
4
Oct 1, 2004 02:00 PM
