Home » Todd Starnes

Grading Media Coverage of the Election

8 November 2008 One Comment Download My Toolbar!

According to the Project for Excellence in Journalism, the national media was in the tank for President-elect Obama. Their exhaustive study concluded there were overwhelmingly more positive stories about Mr. Obama than his opponent, Senator John McCain.

I don’t know about you, but I’m shocked. Stunned. Rocked off my foundation.

I’m about as surprised as the day I found out Santa Claus wasn’t real (sorry kids).

I believe this story is best illustrated by the ombudsman for the Washington Post. After months of coverage the newspaper came to the conclusion that it had treated President-elect Obama better than Senator McCain. Ironically, their discovery came after the general election. Better late than never, I suppose.

Regarding tone, the Washington Post published 58 negative pieces about McCain, only 32 about Obama. Obama was also on the front page more — 176 times, McCain just 144. The editorial page was overwhelmingly for Obama — 32 positive pieces, 13 for McCain.

Oh, yeah — and now that the election is over, the Post discovered that President-elect Obama deserved “tougher scrutiny than he got, especially of his undergraduate years, his start in Chicago and his relationship with Antoin “Tony” Rezko, who was convicted this year of influece- peddling in Chicago.”

The Post ombudsman also offered this very interesting note: “The Post did nothing on Obama’s acknowledged drug use as a teenager.” Might I pose this question — why not?

The national media had no problem dredging up Todd Palin’s DUI record from more than 20 years ago, but newspapers like the Post chose to ignore the President-elect’s self-admitted indiscretions.

Kudos to The Washington Post, though, for fessing up to what their readers have been complaining about all along — they were lopsided.

Your thoughts?





Related Posts

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

One Comment »

  • jbh said:

    As a former educator, first I'd just like to point out the irony: "Sure hon, president Obama used drugs in school and snorted coke in college, and then became president–so I guess it's OK, as long as you're careful!"

    The media was scandalously irresponsible and America, unfortunately, will pay. Those same children who Obama has pledged to, well, what exactly did he pledge to do, except to give a little more and ask a little more? I have a friend who honestly had the naivety to say, "well, I just think Obama was more articulate!" Ummmm, last time I checked, it wasn't how you said it, but what you said that should have been important. Speech classes study Adolph Hitler, but does that mean we buy his rhetoric or his philosophies or ideas now that we've had a chance to see what he was up to? No.

    I'm not comparing Obama to Adolph, I'm just saying what a person says, who he associates with, what his ideas are and how he hopes to achieve them–and where he's been and what's he done, should matter. And how the press CHOOSES to report all this, is indicative of whether they are truly being at least fair, let alone objective.

    On the other hand, the media, in general, has often said they are entirely liberal in the aforementioned when it comes to ideas, philosophies, etc., so it should not come as a surprise that they have simply pushed their agenda onto an unsuspecting American public.

    I once taught an 10th grade course in Mass Media and it was to teach young people how to DISCERN what they are taking in. Sean Hannity has said that journalism is dead and I agree. But for a few sometimes bright lights in the profession–and FOX news sometimes delivers (not always because they too are driven by ratings and remind me that I got really tired of O'Reilly complaining McCain and Palin should have gone on his show and basically he could have affected a win)–but they sometimes delivers, as does other media outlets which clearly state their worldview and unashamedly report the news truthfully.

    I would be surprised if journalism or media professors even teach the journalist's code of ethics any more–or if many news anchors or producers could name a few of those codes. It appears the public is misinformed or feels unable to hold them accountable and so we have had a spiral effect. I'm not sure even about what to do except to continue to let people know that hopefully FOX will attempt to stay above the fray. I'm counting on people like you Todd and your colleagues. Don't let us down.

Leave your response!

Add your comment below, or trackback from your own site. You can also subscribe to these comments via RSS.

Be nice. Keep it clean. Stay on topic. No spam.

You can use these tags:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

This is a Gravatar-enabled weblog. To get your own globally-recognized-avatar, please register at Gravatar.

This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. © 2009 FOX News Network, LLC. All rights reserved. PRIVACY POLICY