LOGO: Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines. A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion. Editor, Robert Scheer. Publisher, Zuade Kaufman.
2010 Webby Award Winner for Best Political Blog
 
May 26, 2012
Log in / Register

 Choose a size
Text Size

Trending:     gay marriage     barack obama     chris hedges     ndaa     robert scheer
Most Read

TED: 'A Money-Soaked Orgy of Self-Congratulatory Futurism'

Truthdiggers of the Week: 400,000 Canadians Launching the ‘Maple Spring’

Russia and Exxon Mobil Sign Arctic Oil Deal

I Can't Hear Myself Think

A Rare Admission That Money Trumps Everything Else

Most Comments
Most Emailed

Reports
Why Bain Questions Matter
OSHA Struggles When Tower Climbers Die

Ear to the Ground

A/V Booth

Arts & Culture
Better Than We Found It
The Good-Natured Dictator

Digs
Financial Meltdown 101

Truthdig Bazaar more items

 
Ear to the Ground

Media’s Been Hardest on Candidate Obama, Study Shows

Email this item Email    Print this item Print   

Posted on Oct 17, 2011
Flickr / The White House

Keep hugging those babies: President Obama scores some points in Cincinnati on Sept. 22 after a speech plugging his American Jobs Act.

Of all the presidential hopefuls who’ve thus far made their designs on the White House known to the masses, one in particular has been subjected to harsh coverage by the American media, according to the Pew Research Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism—but this special treatment might have something to do with the fact that Barack Obama also happens to be the incumbent.  —KA

‘Political Hotsheet’ on CBS News:

Pew found that Mr. Obama was the subject of negative assessments nearly four times as often as he was the subject of positive assessments. It found he received “positive” coverage nine percent of the time, “neutral” coverage 57 percent of the time and “negative” coverage 34 percent of the time.

The study, which was conducted using a combination of “traditional media research methods [and] computer algorithms to track the level and tone of coverage,” cuts against the widespread conservative claim that the “liberal media” aides Mr. Obama and other Democrats while attacking Republicans.

Pew says it looked at coverage from more than 11,500 news outlets, including local and national broadcasts, news websites and blogs.

Read more

More Below the Ad

Advertisement


New and Improved Comments

We are launching a major overhaul of our comments section.

In addition to more robust spam filtering and moderation, new features include the ability to rate other comments, sort how they are displayed and respond directly via e-mail or in a thread.

Unfortunately, commenters will lose their existing Truthdig identities. It's a pain, we know, but on the plus side you will now be able to log in with a plethora of options, including Google, Twitter, Facebook and Disqus accounts.

Before launching this system we spent months in discussion with our top commenters. We listened to the feedback and we hope you like what we've come up with.

Please direct any problems or concerns to us via our contact page.

OzarkMichael's avatar

By OzarkMichael, October 18, 2011 at 5:11 pm Link to this comment

Of all the presidential hopefuls who’ve thus far made their designs on the White House known to the masses, one in particular has been subjected to harsh coverage by the American media, according to the Pew Research Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism—but this special treatment might have something to do with the fact that Barack Obama also happens to be the incumbent.  —KA

And that he broke promises. And that he drove the economy deeper into the ditch. Incumbents who do that tend to get in some hot water with the electorate.

Or maybe its because the media is RAAAACCCIIISSST!which is what the journalists themselves decided about anybody who criticized Obama last year.

But I wouldnt know. I been sippin’ Slurpees and clinging to my Bible.

Report this

By Jill, October 18, 2011 at 11:52 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Miko,

I agree.  I’m also uncertain if peddling all the false information the administration puts out, such as—the “reasons” we need to attack Iran, was counted as being hard on Obama.  Is it really being hard on someone to disseminate their lies?  The media does that for Obama constantly, be they mainstream or “alternative”.

Report this
PatrickHenry's avatar

By PatrickHenry, October 18, 2011 at 2:30 am Link to this comment

Hard on Obama?  They willfully ignore Ron Paul.

Report this
Outraged's avatar

By Outraged, October 17, 2011 at 10:09 pm Link to this comment

I agree with the article.  We have a whole channel
devoted to trashing Obama, additionally the right
wingers never went out of campaign mode after the
2008 election.  And they’re STILL going.  They’re
willing to trash the whole country to get at Obama.

The right wingers play dirty and the MSM coddles
them.  Did they EVER stop calling for Obama’s birth
certificate…..nope.  Yet the MSM does interviews
with these nutjobs (like Trump, Palin….etc) and
treats the subject as if these scumbags have a valid
argument.

I don’t care what the trolls (you know, those
supposed lefties) claim, Obama has been
consistently attacked.  You don’t have to agree with
everything Obama has done to recognize that very
BLANTANT situation.

Report this
skimohawk's avatar

By skimohawk, October 17, 2011 at 7:57 pm Link to this comment

The author, “the senior political reporter at CBSNews.com” can’t figure out how to run spell-check on an article before publishing it?

I’d be real curious as to their “meathodology”, considering their survey reported “31% positive coverage” for Sarah Palin.
Was this study done in a zoo?
I’m having a difficult time believing humans could be that stupid.

as John (below) said:
Nonsense!
“Hard” on him would be telling the truth: that’s he a goddam liar who sold us out to his buddies running the banks.

Report this

By johncp, October 17, 2011 at 2:44 pm Link to this comment

“Hard on him?”  Nonsense!  “Now,” they’re hard on him.  When he was a candidate, running against Hillary, this same media, were, with few exceptions, showering him with praise.

Report this

By Miko, October 17, 2011 at 10:46 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

On the contrary: if they somehow managed to say nice
things about Obama 9% of the time despite the fact that
he’s delivered us for dinner to the banks and health
insurance companies, started multiple wars, and
launched a covert plan to assassinate U.S. citizens,
among his other crimes against humanity, I would say
that this indicates that the media has been going
really easy on him.

Report this

By Jim Michie, October 17, 2011 at 8:58 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

You wanna-be “journalists” are hopeless.  You wouldn’t know a substantive news story, even if it bit you in the butt!  Few, if any of you, even know how to spell journalism, much less practice it!

Report this
Newsletter

Get Truthdig in your inbox


 
 
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion. Editor, Robert Scheer. Publisher, Zuade Kaufman.
Copyright © 2012 Truthdig, L.L.C. All rights reserved.