No kidding

[Gonz]

What a surprise

By Claudia Parsons

NEW YORK (Reuters) - U.S. media coverage of last year's election was three times more likely to be negative toward President Bush than Democratic challenger John Kerry, according to a study released Monday.

The annual report by a press watchdog that is affiliated with Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism said that 36 percent of stories about Bush were negative compared to 12 percent about Kerry, a Massachusetts senator.

Only 20 percent were positive toward Bush compared to 30 percent of stories about Kerry that were positive, according to the report by the Project for Excellence in Journalism.

The study looked at 16 newspapers of varying size across the country, four nightly newscasts, three network morning news shows, nine cable programs and nine Web sites through the course of 2004.

Source

 

[SouthernN'Proud]

I'd say it was more skewed than that.

The psychology of advertising is a hobby of mine. Studying trends in time placements of various ads, as well as imbedded messages within ads, is very entertaining. It's just a short step from that to newscasts these days...the nightly news is almost a political fillibuster no matter which network one chooses.

 

[Inkara1]

I can't seem to find anything about it at www.cjr.org which is the site of Columbia Journalism Review. CJR is the "press watchdog that is affiliated with Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism" that immediately comes to mind, and they're one of the most respected media watchdogs in the industry. I'm surprised there would be nothing about this at their site.