Study: Big 3 news favors Dems over GOP by 6 times.

Status
Not open for further replies.

Desertdog

Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2002
Messages
1,980
Location
Ridgecrest Ca
They didn't even report on MSNBC or CNN. I wonder what the percentages are for them. Highlights by me.

Study: Big 3 news tilts vs. GOP
By Jennifer Harper
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
http://washingtontimes.com/national/20061031-102955-3604r.htm


The Big Three television networks have used unprecedented midterm election coverage to bash the Republican Party with negative stories, and plenty of them, a study says.
Only 12 percent of election stories that aired on NBC, ABC or CBS were favorable toward Republican candidates, according to a study released yesterday by the District-based Center for Media and Public Affairs (CMPA).
In contrast, Democrats basked in glory. The study found that 77 percent of the news accounts between Sept. 5 and Oct. 22 offered favorable evaluations of Democratic candidates and lawmakers.

"These numbers are pretty striking," said Robert Lichter, director of CMPA, a nonpartisan researcher of news and entertainment media. "The coverage has become a referendum on Republican leadership. The big question for all three networks is this: Why are the Republicans in trouble and how bad is it going to get?"
While midterms typically garner only tepid interest from broadcasters, the networks have dramatically ramped up their coverage this time around, providing 167 stories during the study period. Only 35 stories had been aired during a comparable time in 2002.
The networks have fixated on a trio of story themes. The CMPA study found that the resignation of former Florida congressman Mark Foley dominated the midterm coverage, producing 59 stories, compared with the war in Iraq, which inspired 33, and national security or the threat of terrorism, which produced 31 stories.
Other issues of potential importance to voters -- the economy or redistricting, for example -- got short shrift, such topics earning mention in six or fewer stories.
Speculating on voter behavior is also popular on the networks.
"Another big question they ask is this: What is it the public is rejecting, and what are they so angry about?" Mr. Lichter added.
"CBS Evening News" anchor Katie Couric, for example, said yesterday that 2006 would prove a "wave election, where public dissatisfaction changes the political environment" and "incumbents are washed away."
On NBC, Brian Williams led a report from Ohio with the phrase, "Could this red state end up going blue?" ABC News' Jake Tapper also showcased Ohio voters, saying they showed "an extra layer of disillusion with the Republican Party."
Like negative campaign ads, negative news reports may have a destructive rebound effect on a fickle viewing public.
"For the past week, the mainstream media has run story after story about the nastiness of this year's campaign ads -- perhaps as a way to distract our attention from their own dirty tricks," observed Stephen Spruiell of National Review Online yesterday.
"Viewers can get sick of negative TV coverage. They consistently rate the news coverage as one of the worst parts of a campaign, specifically citing negative content," Mr. Lichter said. And its going to get worse in the shrill run-up to Nov. 7.
"The GOP is the story, and they're caught in an echo chamber," he added.
 
The big three news broadcasters have a liberal bias? My stars! I would never have imagined such a thing could be possible!
 
Somehow I'm not surprised. :scrutiny:

God 10 minutes watching CBS and I think I'm being brainwashed. Granted, Fox are no angels and they are biased to the right, but at least they make an attempt! ABC and CBS, whom I despise, don't even bother to try and mask it... they're biased through to the core and they flaunt it!
 
See? That just proves the government needs to exercise more control over that darned internet, which is packed to the rafters with child pornographers and right wing religious zealots trying to cover for Chimpy McHalliburton.
 
The big 3 are dinosaurs thrashing around in the tar pits.

They are irrelevant and they know it. When the Rs hold onto Congress this election everyone else will know just how irrelevant the Democrat news networks are.

Katie Couric came in #7 a while back. Seventh when there are only 3 major networks...:p Brings a smile to my face.
 
I remember seeing similar studies in 2000 and 2004 when it went the other way. Al Gore in particular had a contentious relationship with the press, and his negative coverage was something like double of Bush's...but I don't recall too many people being up in arms about it.

This has what to do with RKBA?
 
...yawn...yeah, if we lose the RKBA it'll be the big media's fault. :rolleyes:

Bzzzzt!!!!!!

It'll be our fault as gun owners. There are 80mil gun owners, 4mil NRA members.

If gun owners would get off their asses, both parties would have no choice but to listen to us and it wouldn't matter whatever the hell Ted Turner and his ilk said.
 
...yawn...yeah, if we lose the RKBA it'll be the big media's fault.

If the big media does hit pieces like .50 caliber rifles being able to bring down planes from miles away, or assault rifles being more powerful than hunting rifles (and fixing the "tests" to prove it), then yes, they will be repsonsible.

The general population and many gunowners themselves get their information from these media sources. If they are led to believe that only "evil" or "wrong minded" people want these guns, then they will support gun control more fully, and we lose.
 
There are 80mil gun owners, 4mil NRA members.

If gun owners would get off their asses, both parties would have no choice but to listen to us and it wouldn't matter whatever the hell Ted Turner and his ilk said.
That's what I have said all along. A voting block of 80 million cannot be ignored. But we don't have a voting block of 80 million because we can't get gun owners to act and vote like gun owners.:fire:

The antigun extremists have been quite successful with their "divide and conqueor" strategy, which has been helped immensely by the MSM and their leftist/socialist bias.

It sure would be nice if we could get the tens of millions of gun owners who are going to vote for antigun extremists on Nov. 7 to get up off their knees and act like gun owners for a change.
 
i have to agree with helmetcase on this one. there is no excuse for 80 million people being overwhelmed and defeated by big media. that collective voice would be louder, far louder than the voices of all of those networks combined, if only we had the motivation to shout all at the same time. but everybody has excuses. there are so many tings that could be done to draw positive attention to law-abiding gun owners, and so much that could be done to draw attention to negativity and duplicity of the opposition.

this thread reminded me of an idea i suggested a few weeks ago:

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=224589

if not this than something else. all it takes are some good ideas and the willingness to participate, but most seem to be too busy cleaning or complaining to get involved. cleaning and complaining are just fine, but not to the exclusion of acting.
 
So explain how you are going to create the collective voice from the 80 million gunowners? How are you going to inform them of the issues, and how it affects them? Pardon the sarcasm, but weekly dinners are probably out, if only because who has time to cook for 80 million people, and catering would get expensive.

It seems like the only way to reach those individuals is through the media. Yet, a considerable portion of the media is against us, precluding it from being a mechanism for organization and change. This is, of course, a fact you all consider to be irrelevant.

So again it begs the question: how are you going to get gunowners to have a collective voice, recognizing that the gunowners on THR (who have sought out this board and chosen to become members, taking steps far beyond the average gunowner) don't have a collective thought on these issues?

Open Carry Day is great. What are you going to do when the media describes it as a few (anything less than millions were be considered minor) zealots who are endangering the public, and put talking head after talking head up to show how the media view is correct?
 
...the gunowners on THR (who have sought out this board and chosen to become members, taking steps far beyond the average gunowner) don't have a collective thought on these issues?
[emphasis added]

Buzz has got the crux of the problem identified right here. I cannot believe the asinine comments I read right here on this gun board, and we are the cream of the 80 million. :scrutiny: :eek:

Before you get your Funk & Wagnalls in an uproar, asinine means of or pertaining to a donkey.
 
Last edited:
How do we inform them? We do NOT need ABC, Fox, and CNN to do it. We all have email. We all use the same shooting ranges. We all know about gun shows.

EVERY gun show in the state of Maryland, I man a booth of pro-2A material and talk to as many gun owners as I can. We all need to do that.

You'd be surprised how many people can't be bothered to stop and talk to me or take a piece of lit. They simply say "eh, can't fight the politicians" and go back to shopping. They don't seem to realize that if they don't get active, there won't be any more shopping to do.

What they don't realize is that if we banded together, put petty non-gun related differences aside, and started really hammering on the anti's, we'd beat them into submission in short order.

We all need to be working gun shows to drum up pro-2A support. We all need to take non shooters out for a range day (the single best way to win converts...hell, it's how I got started on this).

That's how we'll win...by getting gun owners to unscrew their heads from their rears and winning new converts, NOT by hoping that ABC, Fox, CBS, TNT, NBC, Ted Turner, Rupert Murdoch, etc. all of the sudden start surreptitiously pushing our agenda.

Screw that. Blaming the media is simply a way for the weak willed to excuse their own defeat. That is NOT what we gun owners should be doing. We're the majority, let's flippin act like it.

The idea that we can only reach gun owners out there by means of the media is so wrongheaded I don't know where to start. I didn't become an active shooter or pro-2A guy because of anything I saw on TV, and I doubt many of you did either.
 
Ok. Lets see what happens if the Dems take over. A lot
of people aren't even going to vote. If the Dems take
over Congress for now until the 08 elections and nothing
gets better, dose anyone think we won't see a pretty
big turnout of conservative voters come 08 ? The GOP
might lose here in 06, but I wouldn't take that bet come
08..As for the list of the 3 top GOP members considering
a run at the presidency so far..IT'S MAKIN' ME ILL ! :barf:
 
Dude, the story is from The Washington Times. You're expecting objective journalism? Joke's on you!!!
 
Bias irony

So the bias irony here is amazing. The media may be, and most likely is biased but:

1) The Washington times, come on...the Moony Times?
2) Reporting on a report from Center for Media and Public Affairs which is a supposed "nonpartisan" group that gets 86% of it's funding from 3 conservative donors (Scaife, Olin, Smith Richardson).

Noops
 
Dude, the story is from The Washington Times. You're expecting objective journalism? Joke's on you!!!
If it is correct, does it really matter who prints it?

Instead of just trashing the source, try to prove them wrong. If they are wrong, pass on what you find and discredit them.:banghead:
 
Open Carry Day is great. What are you going to do when the media describes it as a few (anything less than millions were be considered minor) zealots who are endangering the public, and put talking head after talking head up to show how the media view is correct?

this is exactly what i'm talking about. instead of saying, "yeah, i'll definitely do it", and then going and telling every gun owner you know about it, you would rather come up with excuses as to why this or any idea won't work. self-defeatism, laziness, enslavement to pessimism, penchant for playing devil's advocate...i can't tell which. it's easier to talk than act, i know that for sure.
 
The smart play is to assume they all fib, distort, lie, and mislead. The sport lies in identifying the untruth. I don't expect media to be objective. I do expect it to stick to facts and clearly identify opinion. But alas, none meet my standard. :scrutiny:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top