Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Pew study on media coverage
Author Message
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 66,297
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 3285
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #1
Pew study on media coverage
http://www.weeklystandard.com/how-donald...le/2009920

Interesting read. A couple quotes:

“One of the things that was interesting to see was that, while the topic of the news media was not a huge percentage of overall coverage, journalists were both the second most common source type as well as the second most common ‘trigger’ of the stories,” says Amy Mitchell, director of the Pew Research Center.*
That might go some way in explaining the elite media feedback loop.
<I've noticed how often a story, even insignificant or poorly sourced ones, by one media source gets cited over and over>

In the first 60 days of the Trump presidency, 62 percent of the stories about him were negative—three times the amount of negative coverage received by Barack Obama from the same sources over the same period of his first term, and more than twice that of Clinton and Bush (28 percent).
And, positive coverage? For Clinton, it was 27 percent, for Bush, 22 percent. Barack Obama’s positive coverage in the first 60 days—42 percent. And Donald J. Trump? Five percent. So, those sources—to some, the very definition of the mainstream media—were eight times more positive about Obama’s early presidency than they were about Trump’s.
Pew makes clear that its studies do not attempt to detect bias in the news media’s presidential coverage. And, of course, it didn’t really need to. The coverage speaks for itself.
10-04-2017 08:05 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 66,297
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 3285
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #2
RE: Pew study on media coverage
Also this:

"The Pew researchers categorized media outlets according to the politics of their audiences—liberal, conservative, or in the middle. Not surprisingly, outlets with liberal audiences (NYT, Politico, and NPR among them) were the most negative in their reporting on Trump, reporting unfavorably 56 percent of the time. Conservative outlets (Fox News, Breitbart, talk radio) were the most positive, reporting favorably 31 percent of the time. Pew found that liberal outlets tended to use more sources than conservative outlets, but that conservative news sources produced far more stories (55 percent of them) that were neutral in tone."
(This post was last modified: 10-04-2017 08:07 AM by bullet.)
10-04-2017 08:07 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
stinkfist Online
nuts zongo's in the house
*

Posts: 68,369
Joined: Nov 2011
Reputation: 6859
I Root For: Mustard Buzzards
Location: who knows?
Post: #3
RE: Pew study on media coverage
the more they run their mouths, the better I feel about things moving forward....the dippos cannibalize their own.....
10-04-2017 08:58 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DavidSt Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 23,011
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 732
I Root For: ATU, P7
Location:
Post: #4
RE: Pew study on media coverage
(10-04-2017 08:05 AM)bullet Wrote:  http://www.weeklystandard.com/how-donald...le/2009920

Interesting read. A couple quotes:

“One of the things that was interesting to see was that, while the topic of the news media was not a huge percentage of overall coverage, journalists were both the second most common source type as well as the second most common ‘trigger’ of the stories,” says Amy Mitchell, director of the Pew Research Center.*
That might go some way in explaining the elite media feedback loop.
<I've noticed how often a story, even insignificant or poorly sourced ones, by one media source gets cited over and over>

In the first 60 days of the Trump presidency, 62 percent of the stories about him were negative—three times the amount of negative coverage received by Barack Obama from the same sources over the same period of his first term, and more than twice that of Clinton and Bush (28 percent).
And, positive coverage? For Clinton, it was 27 percent, for Bush, 22 percent. Barack Obama’s positive coverage in the first 60 days—42 percent. And Donald J. Trump? Five percent. So, those sources—to some, the very definition of the mainstream media—were eight times more positive about Obama’s early presidency than they were about Trump’s.
Pew makes clear that its studies do not attempt to detect bias in the news media’s presidential coverage. And, of course, it didn’t really need to. The coverage speaks for itself.


Obama did not create much chaos like the three did. It was later on in his Presidency that chaos erupted because the queen witch Hillary. If he just stayed away from her, and never let her be Secretary of State.
10-04-2017 07:16 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


olliebaba Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 28,100
Joined: Jul 2007
Reputation: 2149
I Root For: Christ
Location: El Paso
Post: #5
RE: Pew study on media coverage
You can't create chaos if you don't do squat. It's so simple. But, you are also right, much of it was because of Killary. Just shows how bad she would have been as president.
10-04-2017 07:34 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 66,297
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 3285
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #6
RE: Pew study on media coverage
(10-04-2017 07:34 PM)olliebaba Wrote:  You can't create chaos if you don't do squat. It's so simple. But, you are also right, much of it was because of Killary. Just shows how bad she would have been as president.
The more she talks, the more it should become obvious to everyone that she was an unbalanced, incompetent, delusional nut. The US dodged a bullet.
10-05-2017 07:59 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 66,297
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 3285
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #7
RE: Pew study on media coverage
http://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/3...ing-us-for

Bill O'Reilly thinks the media is taking us all for morons, using the Tillerson non-story as an example.

There is another explanation. The media is all morons.
10-05-2017 09:09 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.