Voters Give Media An “F” For Election 2008
Voters Give Media Failing Grades in Objectivity for Election 2008
RASMUSSEN -
Just 17% of voters nationwide believe that most reporters try to offer unbiased coverage of election campaigns. A Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that four times as many—68%–believe most reporters try to help the candidate that they want to win.
The perception that reporters are advocates rather than observers is held by 82% of Republicans, 56% of Democrats, and 69% of voters not affiliated with either major party. The skepticism about reporters cuts across income, racial, gender, and age barriers.
Ideologically, political liberals give the least pessimistic assessment of reporters, but even 50% of those on the political left see bias. Thirty-three percent (33%) of liberals believe most reporters try to be objective. Moderates, by a 65% to 17% margin, see reporters as advocates, not scribes. Among political conservatives, only 7% see reporters as objective while 83% believe they are biased.
Given these results, it’s not surprising that 76% of voters believe the media has too much power and influence over elections. Just 3% believe the Fourth Estate has too little influence while 16% say the balance is about right.
Eighty-seven percent (87%) of Republicans believe the media has too much influence along with 80% of unaffiliated voters and 65% of Democrats.
Voters have little doubt as to who is benefitting from the media coverage this year—Barack Obama. Fifty-four percent (54%) say Obama has gotten the best coverage so far. Twenty-two percent (22%) say McCain has received the most favorable coverage while 14% say that Hillary got the best treatment.
At the other extreme, 43% say Clinton received the worst treatment from the media. Twenty-seven percent (27%) say the media was roughest on McCain and only 15% thought the media coverage was most unfair to Obama.
Looking ahead to the fall campaign, 44% believe most reporters will try to help Obama while only 13% believe that most will try to help McCain. Twenty-four percent (24%) are optimistic enough to believe that most reporters will try to offer unbiased coverage.
Even Democrats tend to believe their candidate will receive better treatment—27% of those in Obama’s party believe most reporters will try to help him win while only 16% believe they will help McCain. A plurality of Democrats—34%–believe most reporters will be unbiased.
Among unaffiliated voters, 44% believe reporters will try to help Obama and 14% believe they will try to help McCain. Seventy percent (70%) of Republicans expect Obama to receive preferential treatment while only 8% believe reporters will try to help McCain.
African-Americans are fairly evenly divided as to who reporters will try to help this fall. Sixty percent (60%) of African-Americans say either that the coverage will be unbiased or they are not sure.
Those who plan to vote for Obama are evenly divided as well. McCain voters—by a 75% to 5% margin—say that most reporters will try to help Obama win this November. Among those who are undecided or planning to vote for a third party candidate, 47% expect Obama to be the media favorite while just 6% say that McCain will be the preferred candidate.
A survey conducted earlier this year found that 30% of voters believe having a friendly reporter is more valuable than raising a lot of campaign contributions. Twenty-nine percent (29%) believe contributions are more important and 40% are not sure.
These results are consistent with earlier surveys finding that large segments of the population believe the media is biased It is also clear that voters select their news sources in a partisan manner. During Election 2004, CNN viewers heavily favored John Kerry while Fox Fans preferred George W. Bush.
—————————————————————————————
ME: Just wait … Ya ain’t seen nuthin’ yet …
Be respectful of others and their opinions. Inflammatory remarks and inane leftist drivel will be deleted. It ain’t about free speech, remember you’re in a private domain. My website, my prerogative.
If you can't handle using your real email address, don't bother posting a comment.
OMG! the news coverage this time around has been so awful. Obama never gets any shit for any of the scandals he has been involved in.
Pastor Wright
Throwing his poor grandma under the bus
Alleged dealing with Tony Rezko
His wife never being proud of her country until now
Him being friends with William Ayers
the list just goes on and on and they will do their very best to put Obama in as president. McCain gets shown for 30 seconds and then we get to see 10 minutes of Obama coverage. and this is coming from the same side who wants to impose the ‘fairness doctrine’. HA!
June 8th, 2008 at 9:29 amGood stuff Kurt…Tellin’ it like it is.
Of course, we don’t want to forget McCain’s contribution to Campaign Finace Reform. Or as some more correctly refer to it, Demedia Gone Wild.
“30% of voters believe having a friendly reporter is more valuable than raising a lot of campaign contributions.”
June 8th, 2008 at 9:56 amThere is a large Dhimi segment out there who is disappointed that her thighness lost the nomination. That’s what makes this election interesting.
Remember the 2004 election and all the media blathering over Lurch Kerry? He lost despite the media kissing his ass or sucking his traitor dick.
It’s going to happen again. It’s not the media that determines who wins Presidential elections…its the people
that make that determination.
But I digress….
So Chrissy Mathews can play with himself all he wants to while his peon-candidate runs off at the mouth. In November, it won’t mean a damn thing.
My question to Chrissy is what’s a matter dude, Kathleen not giving it out anymore? So now you gotta play with yourself on national TV? Or have you gone gay?
Damn maggot.
June 8th, 2008 at 10:02 amyou bring up a very good point about McCains contribution to Campaign Finance Reform. but from what i hear Karl Rove is putting together quite a ‘war chest’ for him. Cant remember where i read that, could have been here. but i will search for that story and post the link when i find it.
But then i also have to agree with Dan(The Infidel)
At the end of the day it wont be money or the media coverage. I would venture to guess that at least a slight majority of people know who they are voting for already. my only question is which way will the Clinton voters go. and i think McCain will own the Independents.
June 8th, 2008 at 10:13 amMember of the mains.tream media, particularly the Editors In Chiefs love to advertise daily that their parents were too ignorant and stupid to teach them Honesty, Ethics and Integrity. They have no clue what those words mean.
They also have nose problems, they love having their noses in other people’s crotches so they will have some news they can masturbate to. I bet they have autographed Obama Knee Pads.
June 8th, 2008 at 11:19 am“Just 17% of voters nationwide believe that most reporters try to offer unbiased coverage of election campaigns.”
And yet, this is the same crowd that accepts without hesitation anything the same media has to say about Iraq and Afghanistan. I don’t believe for an instant that these democrat buffoons don’t trust the media; they just don’t like what the media had to say about their respective politician-heroes. As soon as the media starts harping on McCain, they’ll forget about their angst and gush over everything Chris Matthews and his buddies have to say.
June 8th, 2008 at 11:49 amGood to see that there are a lot of people out there who realize the lack of objectivity in the media today.
June 8th, 2008 at 12:22 pmThis is encouraging that the US public sees through the spin. My spouse picked up an LA Times this Sat. and I tried to read it with my coffee, but had to put it down when I encountered 4 virulently venomous anti-Bush articles in the Opinion and Entertainment sections. It was pure hatemongering. No major daily has any right to do that–encouraging crazies to take a shot at our President. What if “Bush” were exchanged for “Obama” in the article–whould there be a cry of outrage? Also, I walked by a section of Barnes and Noble and I thought, what’s this, the “Hate America” section? It was “Current Affairs.” I took some of the more reasoned, normal books that were stashed at the end, on the bottom and put them at the top, at the front, covering the crazy books that were pure anti-American propaganda. Ha ha ha ha.
June 8th, 2008 at 7:53 pmThe quote about siding with the Muslims when the chips are down should be repeated over and over, ad nauseum. Ts, ads, billboards, graffiti, skywriting. Drive it home who this guy is working for.
June 9th, 2008 at 12:44 am