CMPA Study on Positive/Negative Press Coverage of Presidential Candidates

[Ogre Mage]

The Center for Media and Public Affairs has done a study on positive/negative press coverage of Presidential candidates.  Their results are from CMPA’s 2008 ElectionNewsWatch Project. They are based on a scientific content analysis of 765 election news stories (22 hours 15 minutes of airtime) that aired on the flagship evening news shows on ABC, CBS, NBC and FOX (the first 30 minutes of “Special Report with Brit Hume”, which is most like the network news shows in content and presentation) from December 16, 2007 through January 27, 2008. Their findings include:

*Since mid-December, when the presidential candidates turned their full attention to the Iowa caucuses, Sen. Barack Obama has led the race for good press and Sen. Hillary Clinton has lagged the farthest behind. From Dec 16 through Jan 27 five out of six on-air evaluations of Obama (84%) have been favorable, compared to a bare majority (51%) of evaluations of Mrs. Clinton.

*The gap in good press has widened since the New Hampshire primary, with Clinton dropping to 47% positive comments and Obama holding steady at 83% positive. NBC’s coverage has been the most critical of Clinton – nearly 2 to 1 negative (36% positive and to 64% negative) Conversely, ABC’s coverage was most supportive -- nearly 2 to 1 positive (63% v. 37%). CBS and FOX were more balanced – 50% positive comments on FOX and 56% positive on CBS.

*John McCain leads the Republican race for good press with 3 to 1 positive evaluations (73% positive v 27% negative) compared to only a minority of favorable comments (47%) for Mitt Romney. (Huckabee is in between with 57% positive comments.) Since the New Hampshire primary, however, their fortunes have changed, with Romney getting 75% and McCain only 58% positive comments.

*Perhaps surprisingly, coverage of the candidates on Fox News Channel’s “Special Report with Brit Hume” was very similar to that of the broadcast networks. FOX’s coverage of Hillary Clinton was evenly balanced – 50% positive and 50% negative comments, compared to 51% positive and 49% negative on the “big three” networks. The tone of FOX’s coverage of Romney and Obama was also within one percentage point of the broadcast networks.

*FOX stands out for having the heaviest and most issue-oriented election coverage.  The first half-hour of “Special Report” has devoted 7 hours 52 minutes to election news since mid-December, an average of over 11 minutes per night, nearly half the newscast after commercial breaks. By contrast, the broadcast networks have averaged 5 hrs 8 min, or seven minutes a night.  FOX was also twice as substantive as the broadcast networks. Almost one-third of all stories on FOX (30%) dealt with policy issues, nearly double the proportion (16%) on the networks. FOX also carried less coverage of the horse race and candidate tactics than any of broadcast networks.


Link to story:  www.cmpa.com/election%20news%202_1_08.htm

The CMPA Wikipedia entry can be found at en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Center_for_Media_and_Public_Affairs

[Gustaf]

This was really interesting. Funny that it got no comments though.

[Mr. Morden]

*FOX stands out for having the heaviest and most issue-oriented election coverage.  The first half-hour of “Special Report” has devoted 7 hours 52 minutes to election news since mid-December, an average of over 11 minutes per night, nearly half the newscast after commercial breaks. By contrast, the broadcast networks have averaged 5 hrs 8 min, or seven minutes a night.

This is really apples & oranges.  The broadcast networks' nightly newscasts are supposed to cover everything that's going on in the world, not just politics.  FNC's Special Report is a show specifically about politics.  Why would anyone be surprised that they cover more politics than the ABC, CBS, and NBC Nightly News?  If you're going to compare Fox News Channel programming against anything, you should compare it to CNN and MSNBC.

[CARLHAYDEN]

The Center for Media and Public Affairs has done a study on positive/negative press coverage of Presidential candidates.  Their results are from CMPA’s 2008 ElectionNewsWatch Project. They are based on a scientific content analysis of 765 election news stories (22 hours 15 minutes of airtime) that aired on the flagship evening news shows on ABC, CBS, NBC and FOX (the first 30 minutes of “Special Report with Brit Hume”, which is most like the network news shows in content and presentation) from December 16, 2007 through January 27, 2008. Their findings include:

*Since mid-December, when the presidential candidates turned their full attention to the Iowa caucuses, Sen. Barack Obama has led the race for good press and Sen. Hillary Clinton has lagged the farthest behind. From Dec 16 through Jan 27 five out of six on-air evaluations of Obama (84%) have been favorable, compared to a bare majority (51%) of evaluations of Mrs. Clinton.

*The gap in good press has widened since the New Hampshire primary, with Clinton dropping to 47% positive comments and Obama holding steady at 83% positive. NBC’s coverage has been the most critical of Clinton – nearly 2 to 1 negative (36% positive and to 64% negative) Conversely, ABC’s coverage was most supportive -- nearly 2 to 1 positive (63% v. 37%). CBS and FOX were more balanced – 50% positive comments on FOX and 56% positive on CBS.

*John McCain leads the Republican race for good press with 3 to 1 positive evaluations (73% positive v 27% negative) compared to only a minority of favorable comments (47%) for Mitt Romney. (Huckabee is in between with 57% positive comments.) Since the New Hampshire primary, however, their fortunes have changed, with Romney getting 75% and McCain only 58% positive comments.

*Perhaps surprisingly, coverage of the candidates on Fox News Channel’s “Special Report with Brit Hume” was very similar to that of the broadcast networks. FOX’s coverage of Hillary Clinton was evenly balanced – 50% positive and 50% negative comments, compared to 51% positive and 49% negative on the “big three” networks. The tone of FOX’s coverage of Romney and Obama was also within one percentage point of the broadcast networks.

*FOX stands out for having the heaviest and most issue-oriented election coverage.  The first half-hour of “Special Report” has devoted 7 hours 52 minutes to election news since mid-December, an average of over 11 minutes per night, nearly half the newscast after commercial breaks. By contrast, the broadcast networks have averaged 5 hrs 8 min, or seven minutes a night.  FOX was also twice as substantive as the broadcast networks. Almost one-third of all stories on FOX (30%) dealt with policy issues, nearly double the proportion (16%) on the networks. FOX also carried less coverage of the horse race and candidate tactics than any of broadcast networks.


Link to story:  www.cmpa.com/election%20news%202_1_08.htm

The CMPA Wikipedia entry can be found at en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Center_for_Media_and_Public_Affairs

Excellent pos!

[Beet]

This explains a lot of the head-to-head polls at the moment.