Baier ignored study's finding that media coverage of Obama's policies skewed negative
SUMMARY: Fox News' Bret Baier cited a conclusion from a media study that President Obama received more positive coverage through his first 50 days than President Bush or President Clinton but not the study's conclusion that Obama's "positive media image hasn't precluded heavy criticism of his policies."
On the April 27 edition of Fox News' Special Report, citing a press release for a Center for Media and Public Affairs (CMPA) study on media coverage of President Obama's first 50 days in office, host Bret Baier mentioned only the CMPA's conclusion that Obama received more positive coverage through his first 50 days than President Bush or President Clinton but not its conclusion that Obama's "positive media image hasn't precluded heavy criticism of his policies." Baier reported that the study found that "[t]he coverage on the broadcast nets was judged 58 percent positive for President Obama. That compares to 33 percent for President Bush, and 44 percent for President Clinton." However, Baier ignored the study's other conclusion as stated in the press release: "While Mr. Obama's personal qualities and leadership abilities have drawn mostly praise from the mainstream media, his policies have not fared so well."
From the CMPA press release:
The media have given President Obama more coverage than George W. Bush and Bill Clinton combined and more positive coverage than either received at this point in their presidencies, according to a new study by researchers at George Mason and Chapman Universities. But the study also finds that Mr. Obama's positive media image hasn't precluded heavy criticism of his policies.
[...]
While Mr. Obama's personal qualities and leadership abilities have drawn mostly praise from the mainstream media, his policies have not fared so well. On the broadcast networks fewer than two out of five evaluative soundbites (39%) praised his policies and proposals. ABC's policy coverage was relatively balanced (48% positive), while source and reporter comments ran over two to one negative at both CBS (32% positive) and NBC (31% positive).
TV news coverage of the president's economic policies, which focused mainly on the economic stimulus and the various proposed and enacted industry bailouts, garnered support from only 37% of evaluative soundbites. He fared better on domestic issues other than the economy, where praise for his health care proposals and new stem cell research policy brought balanced coverage overall (50% positive). But only one out of four comments (24%) praised his foreign policy decisions, including the war on terror.
Negative Example: "The Obama administration is paying too much money to the wrong people." - Economist, CBS, March 20
The New York Times policy coverage, while less positive than its personal coverage of Mr. Obama, was about evenly divided between praise and criticism (48% positive). Although similar to the broadcast networks in its treatment of economic policy (40% positive), the Times portrayed other domestic policy areas relatively favorably (60% positive), and its 39% positive coverage of foreign policy domains was still more favorable than the networks' 24% positive coverage.
Positive Example: Mr. Obama's actions "reaffirmed American values and are a ray of light after eight long, dark years." - ACLU executive, New York Times, Jan. 22
By contrast, Fox News coverage was even more negative toward Mr. Obama's policies than the Times was positive. Only one out of twelve evaluative soundbites (8%) praised any of the president's policies, including six percent positive judgments on the economic matters, seven percent on other domestic issues, and 17% on foreign affairs. [emphases added]
The press release reported that CMPA covered the first half-hour of Special Report as "Fox News coverage," noting it "most closely resembles the broadcast network newscasts." CMPA has not yet released the study.
From the April 27 edition of Fox News' Special Report with Bret Baier:
BAIER: President Obama is getting more coverage -- and more positive coverage -- from the media than his two predecessors. A new study of his first 50 days in office reveals the network evening newscasts devoted 27 hours, 44 minutes, of coverage to his presidency. George W. Bush received just under eight hours in his first 50 days; Bill Clinton, 15 hours.
CBS had almost 11 hours, NBC was next with nine and a half, ABC had seven and a third. The study looked at the first half-hour of Special Report on Fox, and we had 10 hours, 24 minutes.
The coverage on the broadcast nets was judged 58 percent positive for President Obama. That compares to 33 percent for President Bush, and 44 percent for President Clinton.
NBC was most positive at 61 percent, CBS was at 58 percent, ABC 57, and Special Report was at 13 percent. The study authors described this show as Fox News Special Report, "which most closely resembles the broadcast network newscasts." The study did not look at CNN or MSNBC.















OT, but Arlen Specter, switching sides. W/Franken, that puts the senate at 60. Bye bye, GOP...
Just keeping OT confined to one spot:
Yet another shooting of police officers by an angry and paranoid man with a military background. And just like the last one, this one believed Obama was going to come get his guns.
Sometimes you amaze me at your lack of introspection.
What does exposing right wing racists for what they are have to do with me? Your continued support for them says way more about you, and not in a good way.
And yours is boringly ordinary and expected.
As far as Specter goes, I'm reminded of some lines from a Dylan song:
You've got a lotta nerve, to say you are my friend;
When I was down, you just stood there grinnin'
You've got a lotta nerve to say you've got a helping hand to lend;
You just want to be on the side that's winnin'.
But since that's us, hey, we'll clear some space on the bandwagon for you...:P
If he's trying to advertise for Fox, then the faults here are easy to spot, the most clear one being that each of the presidents' separate first fifty days placed them under separate circumstances. Also, the definition of 'positive' news is absent.
Also, 13% of 10 hours and 24 minutes over 50 days means that on average, Baier would have had enough time to tell us what the president did on a given day, then would have spent another 10 minutes or so telling us that it was bad.
Only in the topsy turvey world of MMFA can a report by Fox that reports positive coverage for Obama be considered "conservative media misinformation".
What a hoot! Thanks for the laugh...
I wish I could say that only AA ignores facts and reality to spin, well, just about everything but sadly it seems to be that many on the rightwing will do just that
Can he seriously think that reporting that the media has been positive toward Obama doesn't feed the right-wing narrative? That the fact that the report also mentioned strong criticism of policies isn't relevant?
Well, given some of the other garbage he claims to believe, yes. Yes, he can.
The point is that Fox is omitting from the study any negative coverage of Obama's policies. Thus helping to fuel the whole "MSM liberal bias" and "MSM in the tank for Obama" nonsense that right clings to.
You forget the golden rule AA. If anyone anywhere anytime any place says anything negative about Obama it must be miss info.
I hope he gets to ram his entire agenda through congress. Nothing will bring the right back next election like his massive budget failure, his hug a terrorist program, and the division he will cause. I dont care how down and out the right is now, the left has never been smart enough to finish the deal. This time will be no different.
"If anyone anywhere anytime any place says anything negative about Obama it must be miss info." - POV
Wrong. Fox's omission of any negative coverage is the issue. It is designed to appeal to the cult like minority that throw their hands in the air and emphatically shout "See? SEE!!?? Liberal bias!!!"
The rest of your snarky drivel isn't worthy of a response.
Your delusions are hysterical. I just love a free clown show
The best part is that AA and POinty are so confused they can't even agree on the same line of bulllsh*t.
AA is attempting to mock the idea that imaginary positive coverage of Obama works to the wingnuts agenda.
Then The Pointy One tries to sarcastically back him up by mistakenly thinking the subject here is simply negative coverage of Obama.
They should just wear size 18 shoes and red noses and get it over with.
Nothing will bring the right back next election like his massive budget failure, his hug a terrorist program, and the division he will cause. I dont care how down and out the right is now, the left has never been smart enough to finish the deal. This time will be no different.
Delusional thinking like your's is what makes repugs a diminishing political force. You have no room for republicans, only repugs. That 22% of the vote isn't gonna win elections. Keep dreaming.
I hate to break it to you, but just because thats the golden rule for republicans doesn't mean the dems follow it. In fact, I recall Obama specifically saying that doing what the republicans have been doing for the last 8 years isn't going to cut it.
After the disaster known as Hurricane Bush, I would think Obama would get more favorable coverage. Anyone who succeeded possibly the worst president in American history would.
Anyhow, there's not much to criticize. Most the stuff the far right is complaining about is petty.
FoxNews will "NEVER, EVER" give 100% true and complete political coverage about President Obama or the Democrats - period. If a survey was taken today to see how cable networks have covered President Obama over the past 100 days the numbers may look like so:
FoxNews Channel - 99% of "NEGATIVE" political coverage about Pres. Obama each hour over the past 100 days. Most "disrespect" for an American President.
CNN & MSNBC - 40% of "NEGATIVE" political coverage about Pres. Obama each hour over the past 100 days. Balance "respect" for an American President.
not surprising that bush didn't get much coverage. day one: the president went jogging today. day two: the president rode his bike today. day three: the president invited oil lobbyists to the white house today. day four: due to his exhausting schedule, the president left for a long weekend at camp david to rest up for his trip to his texas ranch the following week.
there's burning the candle at both ends, and then there was bush, who couldn't manage to light one end.