Media Bias From Around the Web
Theres a lot floating around the web today concerning the media love affair with Sen. Barack Obama. While some think its a myth (e.g. the progressive site Think Progres). Well, Investors Business Daily took a look at the numbers, specifically donations to candidates by members of the media.
An analysis of federal records shows that the amount of money journalists contributed so far this election cycle favors Democrats by a 15:1 ratio over Republicans, with $225,563 going to Democrats, only $16,298 to Republicans .Two-hundred thirty-five journalists donated to Democrats, just 20 gave to Republicans — a margin greater than 10-to-1. An even greater disparity, 20-to-1, exists between the number of journalists who donated to Barack Obama and John McCain.
Searches for other newsroom categories (reporters, correspondents, news editors, anchors, newspaper editors and publishers) produces 311 donors to Democrats to 30 donors to Republicans, a ratio of just over 10-to-1. In terms of money, $279,266 went to Dems, $20,709 to Republicans, a 14-to-1 ratio.
…
What is truly remarkable about the list is that, discounting contributions to Paul and Rudy Giuliani, who was a favorite son for many folks in the media, the totals look like this: $315,533 to Democrats, $3,150 to Republicans (four individuals who donated to McCain).Let me repeat: $315,533 to Democrats, $3,150 to Republicans — a ratio of 100-to-1. No bias there.
This should refute the “well, Obama’s just more newsworthy” line that many espouse to refute alleged bias.
Rasmussen polling shows that more people are beginning to recognize this bias. According to their polling, 49% of people believe the media is trying to help Senator Obama (up 5 points from last month), with 14% saying that the media will try to help Senator McCain (note that this polling occurred before the New York Times refused to print McCain’s op-ed). I’m not sure that these polling numbers reflect the 100:1 spending ration observed, but they do represent that the public is partially aware of the biased coverage.
Lastly, to highlight the disparity in media coverage, consider the following from the Wall Street Journal:
CNN interrupts a discussion of whether the media are in the tank for Obama for a news bulletin that Obama’s plane has landed safely–a dog-bites-man story if ever there was one.
You’ve got to be kidding me. This is over the top, and I hope Wolf Blitzer recognizes the irony here. During a discussion on the situation room about whether the media is biased towards Sen. Obama, they interrupted the story to provide coverage of “O Force One” landing. Blitzer followed the interruption with:
All right, Sen. Obama has just arrived at Ben Gurion Airport in Israel. And upon his arrival from Amman, Jordan, he made a brief statement, reaffirming his strong support for Israel.
Cross-Posted at The Gentle Cricket
July 25th, 2008 at 8:40 am
How dare journalists have personal beliefs outside of their careers. If they had any dedication to their profession at all, they would vote Republican and Democrat equally on the same ballot.
July 25th, 2008 at 8:56 am
And between PBS and BBC last evening you’d think by Christ the opinions of the French and Germans were more important than Americans in our own election.
Yeah I like France and Germany, great food, great beer, great countries generally and Im glad we helped them out over the years, but you mean tell me they are that sissified anymore that they couldn’t handle another right of center President?
July 25th, 2008 at 8:58 am
Thanks for your comment, Liem. The point isn’t that they have their own political beliefs. That is just fine. However, if their personal beliefs get in the way of providing fair coverage, that is a problem. The public has the perception that such is the case (as highlighted by Rasmussen), and studies have concluded an overwhelming bias (see HERE).
I’ll add that my personal preference would be to see that media outlets provide information about their employees contributions if (and only if) those employees are contributing to stories about the candidates (that goes for Fox News as much as MSNBC). I think not doing so hides a glaring conflict of interest. And, for the sake of full disclosure, I’ve donated to both Romney and (more recently and to a lesser extent) McCain this cycle, as well as to the GOP.
July 25th, 2008 at 9:56 am
Bias would not be so bad if the media outlets were up front about it.
July 25th, 2008 at 11:41 am
Sucks when the Military AND now the press favor the “evil” Dem over the crumudgeon GOP smear king who cannot get through one day without a major gaff.
Poor TA Gray must be getting little sleep under his mommies bed. with all the terrorists creeping around and the Country (and World) lining up behind the Liberal.. AAHHHHHHH
July 26th, 2008 at 8:49 am
I think we are going to have an early winter.
The nuts are beginning to fall out of the trees.
July 26th, 2008 at 10:31 am
It is so obvious the media is trying to shove Obama down our throats and I am so glad McCain spoke up about this. Obama just plains scares me as he doesn’t have a clue how to run a country! He thinks going on a junket replace the experience we need for our next President on foreign policy. I’m voting for McCain based on his experience, competence, and family values. We are in a terrible energy crisis and we need a straight talking man like McCain in the White House, not Obama who says anything he thinks people want to hear just to get elected. Our great country deserves a great President–that’s why I am voting for John McCain!
July 26th, 2008 at 9:32 pm
Right on Jill.
Like CNN interrupting a discussion of media bias to let us know Obama’s plane has landed safely! (Praise the Lord!)
Thats got to be right up there with “Elvis has left the building”.