How balanced and accurate is the press’ coverage of the presidential candidates?

1 11 2007

In the last post I linked to a study of how the mainstream media treats the different political parties.  In it, I noticed something disturbing.  It shows that coverage of the nuts-and-bolts of presidential campaigning consisted of 63% of all coverage, and the personalities and private life of the candidates and their families accounted for 17%.  The candidates’ ideas and policy proposals got 15% of the coverage.  Just 1% of the reporting examined the candidates’ records or past public performance.

What’s up with that?!?  Are we voting for who runs their campaign the best or for who we think will do the best job?

The study also did some research into what the public wants to see covered by the media about the presidential candidates.  People want more coverage on these issues :

  • Candidates’ position on issues
  • Candidate debates
  • Candidates’ personal backgrounds and experiences
  • The candidates who are not front runners
  • Sources of candidates’ campaign money

Ironically, the people wanted less coverage of “Which candidate in leading in the latest polls”.  But what do we hear the most?  The mainstream media is failing us in providing fair, accurate coverage of the presidential candidates for the 2008 election.  I know that some of the candidates would rather not discuss those issues (but instead blame Bush for all the country’s problems), but it’s the media’s responsibility to present us with the information we need to know to make an informed choice.




7 responses

2 11 2007
Justin Jordan

Politics has never been one of my passions. It seems to me as if they are all corrupt! I try to follow along with it, but there’s so many other things I need to worry about in my day.

If I hear “it’s all Bush’s fault” one more time, I’m going to throw up on the person that says it. I’m not saying I love him, but I don’t think it’s right to blaim the world’s problems on one person. Ever since 9-11, this country has been weird. Who’s to say it won’t get worse when someone else is elected?

Consider that a prophecy!

PS (in response to your last comment)
My church does have an outreach program that feeds the homeless, which is exactly what I had in mind!

2 11 2007

There are times I really despise politics. I used to not follow it at all, but then realized if I was going to complain about it, I at least needed to become educated on it and vote, to make my voice heard. And now I occasionally write about it, which hopefully helps some people think a little more about it.

I think our current political system needs overhauling, because of how the campaigns are run and the media’s coverage and that there’s only two main parties. I’ve written several posts about this before, how the current system isn’t fair and needs to be changed. (Just click on the Politics category to see them.)

I definitely believe that our country will be worse off if certain of the presidential candidates get elected. Some of the candidates are influenced way too much by the groups that want to destroy the freedoms of America and make us into more of a socialist state. People need to think hard about who they’re voting for and what that might lead to. It’s time to get past which political party we prefer and consider what is best for our country.

4 11 2007

Politics is a “necessary evil” in our day and time.Just remember that our country, as we christians know it, can only be detroyed if GOOD PEOPLE STAND BY AND DO NOTHING– The main stream media will not tell you that the Democratic party of today is a socalist based party, but they will tell you the Republican party is the party of the rich —- To get any sort of truth go to christian radio (american family radio) or 2 of my favorite websites is or
There are those among us who would make our country a FREEDOM FROM RELIGION — NOT RELIGIOUS FREEDOM COUNTRY— What makes me so sad is some times we may have to vote for THE LESSER OF 2 EVILS ——————————————-

5 11 2007

Complaining the media is biased is like complaining that sweets are bad for you – many people don’t trust and dislike what they get from the media, but yet still go back to it. The media would change their approach and content if their ratings went down.

Hopefully, that will happen. A lot of folks are getting more & more educated and searching out alternative sources of news information/opinion/analysis (such as blogs like this one, news/talk radio, and non-traditional media outlets). I think it’s a good trend.

It helps when a media figure will be up-front about their bias instead of trying to cover it up or suggest they don’t have one (because we all have a bias one way or another – I’m biased toward Judeo-Christian/traditional, conservative values, for instance). That way, you at least know where the news reporting is coming from!

6 11 2007

Hopefully my “complaining” about the bias of the media will get some people to thinking, since there are actually statistics to back it up. I want to say something, because I know people who follow only the traditional news sources, and the information they receive is very much biased. I’ve heard them complaining about certain things that they blame Bush for, when Bush had nothing to do with it. But that kind of attitude comes from certain media channels on a frequent basis.

I agree that media figures should clarify what are the facts and what are their opinions. Unfortunately many of them present their opinion as fact, which deceives people (and thus is a sin). They’re entitled to their opinion, of course, but to mislead people according to your own preferences is wrong.

14 11 2007
Thomas Wayne

Yeah, it seems like most of what we hear in the mainstream media (MSM) is how Hillary Clinton is the frontrunner in the presidential race. Could that be because she gets more coverage than anyone else? She’s clearly not the best choice for office, so I’d like to hear more about the other candidates. I’m tired of hearing about who they think will win. They should tell us what qualifications each candidate has, so we can make an informed choice.

15 11 2007

They won’t do that. They have an agenda and won’t deviate from their plan to get Hillary Clinton elected, no matter how unqualified she may be.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: