Study: Coverage of Clinton, Obama ‘Almost Identical’
Pew Research Center's Project for Excellence in Journalism, Harvard's Joan Shorenstein Center on Press, Politics and Public Policy Examine Campaign Coverage
By John Eggerton -- Broadcasting & Cable, 5/29/2008 8:00:00 AM
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) did not get tougher press coverage than Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) when it came to the main themes about their character, history, leadership qualities and overall appeal.
In fact, it was just the opposite starting after Clinton criticized the media for being too soft on Obama.
That's according to a new study from the Pew Research Center's Project for Excellence in Journalism and Harvard's Joan Shorenstein Center on Press, Politics and Public Policy.
In fact, according to the study, for the first two months of the year, starting just before the Iowa caucuses, the tone of coverage for both was "almost identical," with both getting about twice as many positives in those categories as negatives.
The tougher coverage, the study said, came at Obama's expense as "the narrative about him began to turn more skeptical and indeed became more negative than the coverage of Clinton herself."
The "trajectory" of that coverage "turned against Obama" well before the issues surrounding his pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, the study found. Instead, it began after Clinton's criticism of the media's allegedly soft Obama coverage during one of the televised debates.
Where the reporting was being done also appeared to affect positives and negatives in some cases. For example, researchers concluded that network morning-news shows offered an "exceptionally positive personal impression" of Clinton, with 84% of the assertions about the candidate positive compared with 61% for Obama, versus 68% and 69% positives for each, respectively, in the media in general.
There were also differences among the cable news networks.
For example, 69% of the assertions about Obama on Fox News Channel were positive, versus 54% for Clinton. And both far outdistanced Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), with only 45%.
On CNN, Clinton was the clear winner, with 70% positives versus 59% for Obama and 49% for McCain.
The most even-handed, at least toward the Democrats, was MSNBC, the researchers concluded, with 72% positives for Clinton and 70% for Obama (McCain got 53%).
The study was of 46 news outlets from Jan. 1-March 9 comprising a mix of news outlets, including 540 stories from network TV and 984 from cable.
For the complete methodology, click here.
-
Reference to Michigan and Florida & Ms Clinton. Don't agree to the rules if you're not going to play by the rules.
Thomas Rose - 5/31/2008 5:05:00 PM EDT -
All Barack Hussein Obama needs to do is remove his name from the November ballot and claim the process was unfair to him.
Joe - 5/29/2008 7:49:00 PM EDT -
I like the way Simon Burns put it:
news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/politics_show/7423033.stm
Hillary Clinton has also been the victim of press bias that has not helped her cause.
Until relatively recently Obama has not been subjected to the same press scrutiny as Clinton has had to put up with.
The press has been mesmerised by the package that Obama presents and failed in the early days to look as carefully into his policy positions and past associations as they have the other candidates.
Additionally, although America may still in some ways be still racially prejudiced, they are even more, as Gore Vidal has pointed out, a nation of misogynists and this has hurt Hillary Clinton.
y - 5/29/2008 7:46:00 PM EDT
No related content found.
-
No Top Articles
Featured Company
-
Digital Rapids
Digital Rapids provides market-leading software and hardware solutions, technology and expertise for transforming live and on-demand video to reach wider audiences on the latest viewing platforms more efficiently, more effectively and more profitably. Empowering applications from..more
VIEW ALL GALLERIES
