Study: Fox Is the Most Fair and Balanced Thus Far in Prez Campaign

[kaydee457 13]

Study: Fox Is the Most Fair and Balanced Thus Far in Prez CampaignBy Tom Blumer | December 27, 2007 - 10:12 ET

A leading nonpartisan media watchdog, the Center for Media and Public Affairs, says so. The "About" page for

CMPA is here.

The Center for Media and Public Affairs (CMPA) at George Mason University ..... found that Fox News Channel's evening news show provided more balanced coverage than its counterparts on the broadcast networks.

A look at the press release reveals the extent of the balance at Fox, and the imbalance elsewhere:

Fox News Channel’s coverage was more balanced toward both parties than the broadcast networks were. On FOX, evaluations of all Democratic candidates combined were split almost evenly – 51% positive vs. 49% negative, as were all evaluations of GOP candidates – 49% positive vs. 51% negative, producing a perfectly balanced 50-50 split for all candidates of both parties.

On the three broadcast networks, opinion on Democratic candidates split 47% positive vs. 53% negative, while evaluations of Republicans were more negative – 40% positive vs. 60% negative. For both parties combined, network evaluations were almost 3 to 2 negative in tone, i.e. 41% positive vs. 59% negative.

On specific GOP candidates:

Among Republicans, Mike Huckabee fared best with evenly balanced coverage – 50% positive and 50% negative evaluations by reporters and sources. Fred Thompson came next with 44% positive comments, followed by Mitt Romney with 40% positive, Rudy Giuliani with 39% positive, and John McCain with 33% positive.

Here's their methodology, again from the PDF:

CMPA has monitored every presidential election since 1988 using the same methodology, in which trained coders tally all mentions of candidates and issues and all evaluations of candidates. We report the evaluations by non-partisan sources, excluding comments by the candidates and campaigns about each other, because research shows that non-partisan sources have the most influence on public opinion, and they are also more subject to the discretion of reporters. However, we maintain data files on partisan evaluations as well.

Teeing it up: I'll leaving it to commenters to discuss why, of all GOP candidates, Huckabee is the one getting a fair shake from Old Media thus far, and whether the 14-point difference in Dem-GOP positive/negative differentials at the big three networks (47/53 [-6] vs. 40/60 [-20]) will narrow or widen as the campaign progresses.

Cross-posted at BizzyBlog.com.

—Tom Blumer is a CPA based in Mason, Ohio and a contributing editor to NewsBusters

article

CMPA

Edited March 17, 2008 by kaydee457

[Ban Hammer 14,636]

[Niels Bohr 72]

Fox, nah....with Bill O'Reilly in there. They're one-sided.

[HAL 9000 96]

Yeah... Faux is the most fair and balanced... lol

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Says nothing really about content quality though. The mistake is in espousing loyalty for a particular news brand when the overall quality of news reporting across all television news networks leaves much to be desired. Its like praising the gloss on one ####### in a whole heap of turds.

[GaryC 7]

Forget it Kaydee, no matter what you post some will always hate Fox News. It runs against their own bias because Fox dares to present both sides rather than just preaching to the choir. Let them sit in their self imposed ignorance. I for one watch CNN, MSNBC and Fox and the bias of the first two shines like a search light. They don't see it because they don't want to see it.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Its not so much about 'hating' Fox News specifically as pointing out that television news programming across the board is of a generally poor quality.

I think US politicians get an easy ride on the corporate networks - they're insulated from any real searching criticism (outside of the usual sensationalist smear stories) and are rarely asked challenging questions. Why else are soundbite talking points so popular in public discourse and (not least) on here?

[DeadPoolX 9]

CNN, MSNBC and FOX all have a bias. Those channels are run by people and as humans, we inevitably have biases. We may try not to and strive to be fair-minded even objective in many ways, but our own viewpoint will always color how we see things -- even if it's just barely noticeable.

So I don't see the point in running around screaming "this channel is more fair than that one!" or "that channel isn't a real one; it's full of propaganda and lies!" The news media is a business, plain and simple. There's nothing remotely "fair" about it. As for "propaganda" and "lies," if you believe everything you hear, see and read -- regardless of the source -- then all I can do is wish you luck in your life, since you'll need it.

[GaryC 7]

CNN, MSNBC and FOX all have a bias. Those channels are run by people and as humans, we inevitably have biases. We may try not to and strive to be fair-minded even objective in many ways, but our own viewpoint will always color how we see things -- even if it's just barely noticeable.

So I don't see the point in running around screaming "this channel is more fair than that one!" or "that channel isn't a real one; it's full of propaganda and lies!" The news media is a business, plain and simple. There's nothing remotely "fair" about it. As for "propaganda" and "lies," if you believe everything you hear, see and read -- regardless of the source -- then all I can do is wish you luck in your life, since you'll need it.

Yes, all do have bias. CNN and the like have it leaning to the left and Fox has it leaning to the right. That is why you only see the left leaning people here b!tch about "Faux" news and not about the others. But on the whole Fox presents both side much better than any of the other news channels do. All I see from CNN et. all is the left's view of things. I guess that is why they like them. I guess since some here call Fox News "Faux" News I should start referring to CNN as the Clinton News Network or MSNBC should be referred to PMSNBC just to get an equal insult in.

[Ban Hammer 14,636]

CNN, MSNBC and FOX all have a bias. Those channels are run by people and as humans, we inevitably have biases. We may try not to and strive to be fair-minded even objective in many ways, but our own viewpoint will always color how we see things -- even if it's just barely noticeable.

So I don't see the point in running around screaming "this channel is more fair than that one!" or "that channel isn't a real one; it's full of propaganda and lies!" The news media is a business, plain and simple. There's nothing remotely "fair" about it. As for "propaganda" and "lies," if you believe everything you hear, see and read -- regardless of the source -- then all I can do is wish you luck in your life, since you'll need it.

Yes, all do have bias. CNN and the like have it leaning to the left and Fox has it leaning to the right. That is why you only see the left leaning people here b!tch about "Faux" news and not about the others. But on the whole Fox presents both side much better than any of the other news channels do. All I see from CNN et. all is the left's view of things. I guess that is why they like them. I guess since some here call Fox News "Faux" News I should start referring to CNN as the Clinton News Network or MSNBC should be referred to PMSNBC just to get an equal insult in.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

The idea that the news media should represent two sides that shill for party politics is part of the problem.

The media is *supposed* to be independent.

[SaadBell 0]

[GaryC 7]

I rest my case. Pure bias and hatred for anything they disagree with. Tow the party line or get smeared.

[SaadBell 0]

[GaryC 7]

Oh no!!!!! America is doomed!!!!! It's all Fox News Big Business and Bush's fault!!!!! We should all just give up now, we are doomed!!!

Jeez, liberals and their sky is falling mentality.