Numbers: Our Data Library

The initial coverage of the war on terror after September 11th was more factual and less speculative and analytical than the press of the Clinton Lewinsky scandal in its early days. 

The press coverage of the Clinton scandal in March 1998, a period that was not as speculative as earlier, was actually more factual in tone than coverage of the war on terror in the months after September 11th.

Newspapers stood out for consistently high levels of factulness in their early coverage of the war on terror after September 11th.

Time was consistently more factual in its approach to covering the war on terrorism than Newsweek in the months after September 11th.

Morning network shows became less factual and more analytical and speculative in their coverage of the war on terror in the months after September 11th.

In contrast to most other media, especially TV, ABC's Nightline in 2001 became more factual and less speculative in the two months after September 11th.

Television news became less factual and more speculative in covering the war on terror in November 2001, but pulled back again some in December.

Stories about the war on terror were deeply sourced in the immediate aftermath of September 11th but began to rely on fewer sources in the months thereafter.

The media generally relied heavily on named sources over unnamed in its coverage of the war on terror in the months after September 11th.

Coverage in newspapers became somewhat more skeptical of the Bush Administration policies in the months after September 11th.