The black sections represent the percentage of those hosted, quoted or interviewed in the media who supported the pipeline. Green represents the opposition and gray indicates neutral parties.
Media Matters turned its bias detectors on the corporate media’s coverage of the Keystone XL pipeline, a proposed $7 billion Canada-to-Texas oil way that the Obama administration put on hold last week. The analysis found that in all mediums, pipeline supporters got more talk time than their opponents, and counted the ways reporters parroted industry’s talking points.
Click through to the full report after reading the opening statement below. —ARK
A Media Matters analysis shows that as a whole, news coverage of the Keystone XL pipeline between August 1 and December 31 favored pipeline proponents. Although the project would create few long-term employment opportunities, the pipeline was primarily portrayed as a jobs issue. Pro-pipeline voices were quoted more frequently than those opposed, and dubious industry estimates of job creation were uncritically repeated 5 times more often than they were questioned. Meanwhile, concerns about the State Department’s review process and potential environmental consequences were often overlooked, particularly by television outlets.