Elections/Campaigns
April 20, 2010
The race for Ted Kennedy’s Massachusetts Senate seat began largely drama-free and little-covered and ended as the most surprising and intensely-covered political story in the country. Which candidate got the most favorable attention? How did coverage change over time? How did the local Boston papers differ in their reporting? A new study examines newspaper coverage of the race.
Hiding in Plain Sight, From Kennedy to Brown
12.4% - Amount of coverage devoted to the U.S. economy from 2007 through 2009
The deep U.S. recession—which erupted into a full-blown crisis with the collapse of Lehman Brothers in September 2008—was the biggest story in the mainstream news media in 2009. It accounted for 20.3% of the overall newshole studied in the News Coverage Index of the Pew Research Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism. Attention to the story peaked in February and March of 2009 (when it filled 40.9% and 40.0% respectively), when the story focused on passage of the $787 stimulus package and efforts to fix the ailing financial sector. That number fell by half (to 20.1%) by April where it continued a slow decline through the end of the year.
But the media by and large did not see this coming. Attention to the economy was minimal in 2007, filling just 1.4% of the overall newshole, despite emerging problems in the housing market. Coverage picked up in 2008—filling 6.3% in the first six months—as the housing crisis worsened and the country questioned whether it was heading into a recession. But after the September meltdown on Wall Street, when the magnitude of the crisis was revealed, coverage exploded, accounting for 21.4% in the last four months of 2008.
In all, coverage of the economy from January 1, 2007 through December 31, 2009 accounted for 12.4% of the newshole, making it the second-biggest story since the beginning of PEJ’s News Coverage Index.
In 2008, the overwhelmingly dominant story was the presidential election, which filled 33.2% of the newshole. The story exploded in January (44.5%), with the crucial Iowa caucus and remained at that high level (except for a minor dip in the summer months), peaking in October (48.3%) as the election drew near. After the November 4 vote, media coverage focused on the incoming president.
But the campaign was really a two-year story. The coverage began in earnest in early 2007 (7.4% in the first quarter) as candidacies were announced and campaigns began. And it emerged as a major story in the fourth quarter of 2007 (18.2%) as the primaries neared. Overall, the election filled 10.8% of the newshole in 2007
Even though election coverage ended at the end of 2008, the presidential campaign remains the biggest NCI story, filling 15.1% of the overall newshole since 2007.
The top story in the News Coverage Index’s first year (2007) was the war in Iraq. It filled 24.9% of the newshole in January 2007, when President Bush announced the controversial “surge” strategy to increase in the troop levels in Iraq despite opposition from Democrats in Congress. Except for a spike in September 2007 (23.2%)—when General David Petraeus released a progress report of the war—coverage trended steadily downward since that January high, likely due to decreased violence in the country and the presidential campaign vying for media attention. By December of 2007, coverage filled just 6.2% of the newshole. For all 2007, the war accounted for 15.5%.
In the past two years, attention to the war in Iraq has dropped dramatically to 3.6% of the newshole in 2008 and down further to 1.7% in 2009. Even with Iraq vanishing from the media radar screen, it registers as the third-biggest story (6.9%) since the Index began.
Users will be able to read more PEJ’s analysis of 2009 news coverage in its State of the News Media 2010 Report which will be available Monday, March 15. They will also be able to analyze PEJ’s content for 2009 on their own with a new Year in the News Interactive.
Tricia Sartor of PEJ
Date Posted: March 10, 2010
48% - Amount of Obama transition stories about appointments and logistics
Since Barack Obama’s victory on Nov. 4, the transition to the incoming administration has been a major theme in the news accounting for 16% of all the stories examined by PEJ’s News Coverage Index from Nov. 5-Jan. 11. And one part of that story—his key appointees and the logistics of transferring power —has been dominant, accounting for nearly half (48%) the transition stories. Not surprisingly, the most newsworthy appointment proved to be Obama’s Secretary of State designate Hillary Clinton. Media speculation in late November about her selection her as well as the official announcement in early December helped create the biggest spikes in coverage of new Cabinet picks.
But with the financial crisis appearing to deepen before he takes office, Obama’s response to that issue was the second-biggest aspect of transition coverage, accounting for 19% of those stories. Much of that coverage stemmed from the incoming President’s aggressive advocacy for quick action on a stimulus package. The third most prominent theme of the transition, at 10% of the stories, involved predictions and evaluations of Obama’s performance and competency, although that coverage has tapered off in recent weeks. One example was Bob Schieffer on CBS contrasting Obama’s more deliberate and measured transition style with that of former President Bill Clinton.
Several other events also became major, if temporary, contributors to coverage of the new administration. The controversy over Obama’s selection of Pastor Rick Warren to deliver the invocation was a big reason why inauguration coverage accounted for 17% of the transition stories the week of Dec. 8-14. And the Gaza conflict had a significant impact the week of Dec. 29—Jan. 4, when global policy challenges accounted for 18% of transition coverage.
Tricia Sartor of PEJ
Date Posted: January 15, 2009
December 15, 2008
PEJ's WEEKLy Content Analysis OF Election 2008
In January 2008, the Project created the Campaign Coverage Index (CCI), a running content analysis of media coverage, that measured both the nature of the campaign narrative and the amount of coverage devoted to each candidate. The CCI was published each week from January 15 through November 4.
January 2008
February 2008
March 2008
April 2008
May 2008
June 2008
July 2008
August 2008
September 2008
October 2008
December 15, 2008
2008 Presidential Campaign Coverage
PEJ produced 20 different reports on the presidential campaign of 2008--in addition to 46 separate Campaign Coverage Index (CCI) reports. The first dated back as far as July 2007. The studies ranged from a detailed analysis of the tone of the coverage in the final general election phase to a content audit of the candidate web sites. We believe the work amounts to the most granular and comprehensive examination of the media coverage of any presidential campaign in American history.
Here is a full list:
Studies
How the News Media Covered Religion in the 2008 General Election (Nov. 20, 2008)
Religion was a bigger story in the 2008 race than it might first at seem, though often it was in a negative light. The Project in conjunction with the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life examines how the media covered religious matters.
The Color of News (Oct. 29, 2008)
How did different press outlets cover the 2008 general election? A follow up study to the Winning the Media Campaign study focuses on the tone of coverage across different media sectors and even specific outlets, particularly on television.
Winning the Media Campaign (Oct. 22, 2008)
From the conventions, through the final debate--the critical phase of the election campaign, did the press favor Barack Obama, or was it disfavor with John McCain? Did Sarah Palin get better coverage than Joe Biden?
How the Media Have Handled Palin’s Religious Faith (Sept. 19, 2008)
Since being named to the GOP ticket by John McCain, Sarah Palin generated extensive coverage of many aspects of her background, her record in public office and her family life. But what did voters learn from the media about the Alaska Governor’s religious faith and beliefs?
McCain vs. Obama on the Web (Sept. 15, 2008)
What presence did the candidates establish online? Did Barack Obama take more advantage of this new platform? Did John McCain ever try to catch up? This report examines the campaign websites to assess the online campaign--an update of an earlier study from 2007.
Running on Faith/Two campaign speeches, one JFK moment? (with Forum)
In the 2008 primaries, religion was already a significant factor for candidates in both parties. But even with the Jeremiah Wright controversy, evangelical voter angst, and a Mormon candidate, the media largely avoided dealing directly with the explosive issue of faith.
Character and the Primaries of 2008 (May 29, 2008)
What were the dominant personal narratives conveyed in media coverage of the presidential candidates? An examination of the 2008 primary season examines the master character narratives that formed in the media.
New Hampshire Teaches National News Media a Lesson (Jan. 9, 2008)
It wasn’t quite “Dewey Defeats Truman,” but after the Jan. 8 Granite State primary confounded many of the pollsters and pundits, one of the key storylines that emerged in coverage of the McCain and Clinton victories was the media’s proclivity to predict and pre-analyze the results.
The Invisible Primary--Invisible No Longer (Oct. 29, 2007)
How did the news media cover the early months of the 2008 presidential election? A joint PEJ and Harvard’s Shorenstein Center report examined the early months, the ones that formed the first impression of the race.
Fred Thompson's Campaign Web Site Was Already in Full Swing (Sept. 4, 2007)
In a follow-up to a July 12 study on the Web sites of the other Presidential hopefuls, PEJ finds that Thompson’s full-service site is among the most sophisticated of anyone running--even before he had declared.
Campaign for President Takes Center Stage in Coverage: Quarterly Report on the News
In the second quarter of 2007, the presidential campaign supplanted the debate over Iraq as the No. 1 story in the media.
Election 2008: Candidate Web Sites, Propaganda or News? - A PEJ Study (Aug. 20, 2007)
A study of 19 campaign sites finds Democrats are more interactive, Republicans are more likely to talk about “values,” and neither wants to talk about ideology.
Topline: Campaign Topic and Top Storylines
Commentaries
The Media Verdict on the Iowa Caucuses is Loud and Clear
Convention Buzz Detector
Numbers
The Media Spotlight Shines Brighter on Michelle Obama than Cindy McCain
Obama Rumors Get More Press
Betting on Biden
Big Events Eclipse the Issues
The Palin Phenomenon
What Cable Channels Are Covering After the Election
Weekly Campaign Coverage Index Reports
In January 2008, the Project created the Campaign Coverage Index (CCI), a running content analysis of media coverage that measured both the nature of the campaign narrative and the amount of coverage devoted to each candidate. The CCI was published each week from January 15 through November 4. Links to all published CCI reports is available here.
12%—Percentage of congressional stories focused on Joe Lieberman since Election Day
The list of post-election Congressional newsmakers is topped by a man at the center of some recent Capitol Hill drama—Joe Lieberman, the Democrat turned Independent turned John McCain supporter. After Barack Obama won the election, Senate Democrats, angry about the Connecticut Senator’s support for McCain, debated whether he should keep the chairmanship of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee. Ultimately, after Obama signaled a conciliatory stance toward Lieberman, he was allowed to stay, but the debate thrust him into the media spotlight. According to PEJ'S News Coverage Index, from Nov. 5–Dec. 7, 2008, Lieberman was the lead newsmaker (at least 50% of a story was about him) in 12% of the stories about Congress.
With less than 1 million people, Alaska may be one of the smallest states population-wise. But it was home to three of the top newsmakers. Attention to Alaska Republican Ted Stevens’ very close race—which could have made him the first convicted felon to win a Senate seat—made him the No. 2 newsmaker, at 10% of the Congressional stories. (That does not include coverage of his corruption case). The man who defeated Stevens by a few thousand votes, Anchorage Mayor Mark Begich, was a lead newsmaker in 3% of the Congressional stories. The most visible Alaska politician works in the State House, not in Washington. But that didn’t keep Sarah Palin from registering in 4% of Congress-related stories based largely on two storylines— speculation that she might succeed Stevens’ in the Senate and her stumping in the hotly contested Georgia Senate race.
The winner of that race—Republican incumbent Saxby Chambliss, who prevailed in a run-off and denied the Democrats a 60-seat majority—was the third-biggest Congressional newsmaker at 7%. And one of the competitors in the still unresolved Minnesota Senate race, Democrat Al Franken, was also among the top headline generators at 6%. A well-known figure, the former Saturday Night Live cast member was a lead newsmaker in three times as many stories as his competitor, incumbent Senator Norm Coleman who has maintained a razor-thin edge through the recount.
Tricia Sartor and Dana Page of PEJ
Date Posted: December 10, 2008
November 20, 2008
What was the big religion story of the general election? A new study by the Project for Excellence in Journalism in conjunction with the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life examines how the media covered religious matters.
How the News Media Covered Religion in the 2008 General Election
October 29, 2008
How have different press outlets covered the 2008 general election? Do cable news channels have clear ideological differences? How does broadcast coverage compare to print? A follow up study to PEJ’s Winning the Media Campaign study focuses on the tone of coverage across media sectors and outlets.
The Color of News
October 22, 2008
With fewer than two weeks left before election day, how has the press covered the race for president? How has the tone of McCain’s coverage compared with Obama’s, or Palin’s. A new PEJ study from the conventions through the last debate offers answers.
Winning the Media Campaign
October 10, 2008
As election day draws closer, complaints about a liberal bias in the press have intensified. On Oct. 6, a crowd at a Sarah Palin rally shouted abuse at reporters after the vice presidential nominee blamed CBS anchor Katie Couric for what Palin called a "less-than-successful interview with the kinda mainstream media." Wall Street Journal columnist Dorothy Rabinowitz has offered concrete examples of reporting that favored Obama. And probably the most strident moment came from McCain senior advisor Steve Schmidt who in September told reporters that the New York Times “is today not by any standard a journalistic organization.”
Where do the current criticisms fit in with the history of national political leaders' relations with the press? Criticism of the press by political figures is hardly new. As far back as 1796, George Washington explained his decision not to seek a third term noting, among other reasons, he was “disinclined to be longer buffeted in the public prints by a set of infamous scribblers.” [1]
The criticism has not always come from the political right. During the Viet Nam War, Presidents Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon alike condemned the press for what they saw as undermining of their war efforts. Bill Clinton’s relationship with the press, never good, soured further during the scandal over Monica Lewinsky, and variously included complaints about both liberalism and a right-wing media machine.
The more overtly partisan and ideological nature of the criticism—that the press is liberal—is relatively new. The modern critique by conservatives that the press is liberal first notably flowered in public in 1964 when former President Dwight Eisenhower raised the complaint at the Republican convention, to wild reaction. The criticism has become noticeably bolder since the 1990s, when Newt Gingrich, representing the second generation of movement conservatism, took power in the House. Yet it may have never been more pointed or personal than this year.
What follows is a timeline, of sorts, of key examples of political leaders attacking the press, which offers something of a guide to how the rhetoric has evolved.
Thomas Jefferson, often regarded as a champion of press freedoms, is famously remembered for saying he would prefer newspapers without a government to a government without newspapers. Yet that was in 1787, before he ran for president. After a heated presidential campaign in 1800, during which newspapers published rumors about his personal life, he offered a number of utterances in the other direction, including:
“The man who reads nothing at all is better educated than the man who reads nothing but newspapers.”[2]
 President Woodrow Wilson made extraordinary attempts at using the press to influence public opinion in favor of his policies. His administration held the first sustained regularly-scheduled presidential press conferences between 1913 and 1915. Upset and discouraged by press coverage resulting from a stream of leaks from his Cabinet, he lamented in a letter to a Senator:
“I am so accustomed to having everything reported erroneously that I have almost come to the point of believing nothing that I see in the newspapers.” [3]
 Upon losing the 1962 race for Governor of California, Richard Nixon famously lashed out at the press, though his critique was more personal than ideological:
“You won’t have Nixon to kick around anymore, because, gentlemen, this is my last press conference ... I hope that the press … recognize that they have a right and a responsibility, if they’re against a candidate, give him the shaft, but also recognize if they give him the shaft, put one lonely reporter on the campaign who will report what the candidate says now and then.” [4]
Former President Dwight Eisenhower inspired wild cheers with an unexpected lashing out at columnists and commentators in a speech at the 1964 Republican National Convention in San Francisco:
“Let us particularly scorn the divisive efforts of those outside our family, including sensation-seeking columnists and commentators, because I assure you that these are people who couldn’t care less about the good of our party.” [5]
 Though at times Lyndon Johnson privately admitted the Viet Nam War was unwinnable, he also privately complained about coverage of the conflict in the press, particularly the New York Times, which he said was undermining public confidence in the administration. He said the people in charge of the newspaper were:
“…a bunch of commies…they want to get out of Vietnam and yield it to them, and I don't think I can quite do that.” [6]
The critique against the press took on new velocity on November 13, 1969, when Vice President Spiro Agnew, in a speech written by William Safire and Pat Buchanan, condemned the phenomenon of “instant analysis” on television, after a critical reaction to a nationally televised speech by Richard Nixon. While the speech was considered striking at the time, the tone seems reserved compared with what one might find today.
“When the President completed his address…his words and policies were subjected to instant analysis and querulous criticism…by a small band of network commentators and self-appointed analysts, the majority of whom expressed in one way or another their hostility to what he had to say. It was obvious that their minds were made up in advance. Now I want to make myself perfectly clear. I’m not asking for Government censorship or any other kind of censorship. I am asking whether a form of censorship already exists when the news that forty million Americans receive each night is determined by a handful of men responsible only to their corporate employers and is filtered through a handful of commentators who admit to their own set of biases.” [7]
Starting in 1971, the office of President Nixon’s White House Counsel Chuck Colson compiled an “enemies list” that originally included 20 people, but in time grew to more. The original list included three news people, although it eventually swelled to more than 50 journalists and media outlets.
The three journalists on the original list were Ed Guthman, Los Angeles Times, Daniel Schorr, CBS, and Mary McGrory, Washington Post columnist. [8]
 In the fall of 1992, as he trailed in the polls in the presidential campaign, President George H.W. Bush produced an anti-media slogan, which the President would mention from the stump:
"Annoy the Media: Re-elect Bush."
After his election, President Bill Clinton also complained about the media, which he sometimes argued was attacking from the left, as he did in this interview with Rolling Stone magazine published in the Dec. 9, 1993 issue:
"I have fought more damn battles here for more things than any President has in twenty years, with the possible exception of Reagan's first budget, and not gotten one damn bit of credit from the knee-jerk liberal press, and I am sick and tired of it, and you can put that in your damn article."
 During Clinton’s second term, Congress appointed Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr to investigate allegations pertaining to President Clinton and White House intern Monica Lewinsky. By early 1998, news headlines began to focus on the tactics behind the investigation. First Lady Hillary Clinton appeared on the “Today Show” on January 27, 1998 and urged more critical coverage of those she believed were conspiring against President Clinton:
“The great story here for anybody willing to find it and write about it and explain it is this vast right-wing conspiracy that has been conspiring against my husband since the day he announced for president.”
The leader of a new generation of conservatives in Congress, Newt Gingrich became increasingly vocal in condemning the press as liberal after becoming Speaker of the House in the mid 1990s. This point was driven home during remarks to an American Society of Newspaper Editors Convention on April 16, 1996:
“I unequivocally believe as a Republican activist that the core of the news media is biased, that the bias is amazing.” [9]
President George W. Bush took the media critique further, by suggesting that it was possible to ignore the media. He told Fox News Washington bureau Chief Brit Hume in a September 22, 2003 interview that he doesn’t pay much attention to the press:
“I glance at the headlines just to get a kind of a flavor for what's moving. I rarely read the stories ... The best way to get the news is from objective sources. And the most objective sources I have are people on my staff who tell me what's happening in the world.” [10]
After the 2004 presidential election, Howard Dean, a former frontrunner who lost the Democratic primary battle, complained about corporate ownership of the news media, the increased focus on entertainment, and the decline of investigative reporting:
“The media is a failing institution in this country. They are not maintaining their responsibility to maintain democracy.” [11]
Former President Bill Clinton also condemned the press during the primary season for sensationalism in suggesting that he had engaged in racial politics against Barack Obama, during an angry exchange on Jan. 23, 2008 with CNN correspondent Jessica Yellin:
“The people of South Carolina are coming to these meetings and asking questions about what they care about. And what they care about is not going to be in the news coverage tonight because you don't care about it. What you care about is this, [whether Bill Clinton is playing the race card against Barack Obama]. And the Obama people know that. So they just spin you up on this and you happily go along.
 In the primary season of the 2008 presidential campaign, Hillary Clinton complained about press coverage being unfairly biased toward Barack Obama, most notably on February 26, 2008 during a debate in Cleveland:
“Well, can I just point out that in the last several debates, I seem to get the first question all the time. And I don't mind. I — you know, I'll be happy to field them, but I do find it curious, and if anybody saw "Saturday Night Live," you know, maybe we should ask Barack if he's comfortable and needs another pillow.”
After John McCain picked Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin as his vice presidential running mate, the McCain campaign excoriated the media for focusing on her personal life and for treating her disrespectfully. Palin herself addressed the issue by portraying herself as a woman aligned with “the people” instead of Washington journalists in her Sept. 3, 2008 speech to the Republican National Convention.
“But here's a little news flash for all those reporters and commentators: I’m not going to Washington to seek their good opinion - I'm going to Washington to serve the people of this country. Americans expect us to go to Washington for the right reasons, and not just to mingle with the right people.”
 On
September 22, 2008, during a conference call with reporters, McCain
senior advisor Steve Schmidt condemned the New York Times for a story
saying McCain campaign manager Rick Davis had been paid about $2
million to help Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac stave off tighter regulation:
“Whatever the New York Times once was, it is today not by any standard a journalistic organization. This is an organization that is completely, totally, 150 percent in the tank for the Democratic candidate, which is their prerogative to be. Everything that is read in The New York Times that attacks this campaign should be evaluated by the American people from that perspective.” [12]
FOOTNOTE
1. George Washington was speaking to his VP John Adams in 1796, explaining his disinterest in a third term. Quotation is taken from Brian J. Buchanan, “Sex and politics as news is hardly new,” First Amendment Center Online, October 20, 2006, http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/news.aspx?id=17558
2. Craig Crawford, Attack the Messenger: How Politicians Turn You Against the Media, (New York: Rowan & Littlefield, 2006), p.3.
3. Woodrow Wilson wrote those words in a March 1914 letter to Senator W. J. Stone of Missouri. Quotation taken from Stephen Ponder, Managing the Press: Origins of the Media Presidency, 1897-1933, (New York: Macmillan, 2000), p. 84.
4. President Richard Nixon, November 6, 1962. Quotation taken from David Wise, The Politics of Lying: Government Deception, Secrecy, and Power, (New York: Vintage Books, 1973).
5. J. Patrick Coolican, “Republicans attack liberal media again…and again,” Las Vegas Sun, September 5, 2008.
6. Kelley Shannon, “Tapes Reveal LBJ's Vietnam Conversations,” Associated Press, November, 18, 2006.
7. Richard Heffner, A Documentary History of the United States, (New York: Signet Classic, 2002), p. 453.
8. Facts on File, Watergate and the White House, vol. 1, pages 96-97.
9. Federal News Service, April 17, 1996.
10. The Hotline, September 23, 2003.
11. Dean made remarks at a November 16, 2004 Yale University Forum titled “The Media and the Election: A Postmortem.” Quotation taken from Yotam Barakai, “Dean ’71 Criticizes News Media,” Yale Daily News, November 17, 2004.
12. McCain Camp Takes Issue With Times Coverage, The New York Times, September 22, 2008. Available at http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/23/us/politics/23times.html?_r=1&ref=politics&oref=slogin.
|
Powered by: Phase2 Technology
