Jon Henke
Bruce "McQ" McQuain
Dale Franks
Bryan Pick
Billy Hollis
Lance Paddock


Recent Posts
The Ayers Resurrection Tour
Special Friends Get Special Breaks
One Hour
The Hope and Change Express - stalled in the slow lane
Michael Steele New RNC Chairman
Things that make you go "hmmmm"...
Oh yeah, that "rule of law" thing ...
Putting Dollar Signs in Front Of The AGW Hoax
Moving toward a 60 vote majority?
Do As I Say ....
QandO Newsroom

Newsroom Home Page

US News

US National News

International News

Top World New
Iraq News
Mideast Conflict


Blogpulse Daily Highlights
Daypop Top 40 Links


Regional News


News Publications

Sounds like a job for the "Fairness Doctrine"
Posted by: McQ on Friday, May 25, 2007

Yes, I'm being snarky, but here you go:
By a wide margin, the news media concentrated on Democratic presidential contenders more than Republicans during the first three months of 2007, according to a study issued on Thursday.

Campaign stories in newspapers, on television, online and on the radio focused on Democrats 61 percent of the time and on Republicans 24 percent, said the Project for Excellence in Journalism, which regularly monitors 48 different outlets to gauge coverage trends.

But don't look to political bias as the most obvious explanation. Three conservative radio talk show hosts - Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Michael Savage - talked about Democrats 75 percent of the time and Republicans 13 percent.

A fascination with the showdown between Democrats Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama is a big factor, said Tom Rosenstiel, the project's director.

The single campaign story to receive the most coverage was Clinton's tiff with former big-money backer David Geffen, who is now contributing to Obama, the study said. This drew even more ink than the first Democratic debate.

"There's nothing structurally to say that the Democratic race is more important or newsworthy," Rosenstiel said.

The study also found that nine out of 10 stories focused on campaign tactics or the relative popularity of the candidates.
Two points:

1) The "Fairness Doctrine" only wants to control what you see emphasized in the first bold paragraph, and not what is talked about in the rest of the story.

2) The last emphasized sentence in the story makes exactly the point made yesterday about the "horserace" vs. substance and issues. Banalities and trivialities now are the standard in political reporting.

Return to Main Blog Page

Previous Comments to this Post 

""There’s nothing structurally to say that the Democratic race is more important or newsworthy," Rosenstiel said."
Now, I’ll admit that I don’t know what something "structurally" would be saying in any event (what does that mean?), but without taking anything away from the comments in the post, could there be a bias that the Republicans (due, of course, to President Bush) cannot win the election and therefore the important issues are among the Democratic contenders, one of whom the MSM still believes it can deliver?

Pundits (like Mr. Willis, who believes that he is Center-Left and that a majority of Americans could hold the same opinion as his on any given point) in their skewed viewpoint might just be thinking that way.
"But don’t look to political bias as the most obvious explanation."
Ooops! Sorry. I haven’t acquired the liberal knack of ignoring the obvious in favor of some nuance that supports the LN.

Written By: Robert Fulton
URL: http://
No... It’s just that the MSM knows that most of their audiance is liberal, and so they run stuff about the canidates the viewer cares about...

As for Rush and Hannity et al (seriously, is Savage a conservative? I’ve always thought he was just gug-f*ck nuts), since the Repubs have a pretty crappy field thus far, why talk about them?

It’s dull, dumb, boring or insane... What a group of choices!!
Written By: Scott Jacobs
URL: http://
I’m confused. So talk radio needs to talk less about Democratic issues and candidates and more about Republican issues and candidates? And Democrats support this doctrine? Wow. Who would have thunk it. They are much less partisan than I thought.
Written By: timactual
URL: http://
What is more likely to happen is the fairness doctrine will have ’conservatives’ labeled as ’republicans’. And basically force those radio stations to carry commercially non-viable liberal shows. The station will suffer financial, go out of business, or switch formats altogether.

I’m shocked that the radio talk show host who shall not be named, was named.
Written By: jpm100
URL: http://
So interesting site, thanks!
Written By: Jamie

Add Your Comment
  NOTICE: While we don't wish to censor your thoughts, we do blacklist certain terms of profanity or obscenity. This is not to muzzle you, but to ensure that the blog remains work-safe for our readers. If you wish to use profanity, simply insert asterisks (*) where the vowels usually go. Your meaning will still be clear, but our readers will be able to view the blog without worrying that content monitoring will get them in trouble when reading it.
Comments for this entry are closed.
HTML Tools:
Bold Italic Blockquote Hyperlink
Vicious Capitalism


Buy Dale's Book!
Slackernomics by Dale Franks