The Media Select Their Candidate

Mitt Romney has charged that the news media are biased in favor of Barack Obama and against him. As usual, the facts are otherwise. (See my previous posts on media bias here and here.) It's not clear whether the Elephants actually believe the liberal bias claim, or are “working the refs.”

This week, the nonpartisan Pew Research Center's Project for Excellence in Journalism released is first survey of 2012 campaign coverage in over 11,000 news outlets. The survey analyzed two aspects of news coverage: (1) the frames used to cover campaign news between November 1, 2011 and April 15, 2012, and (2) the tone (positive, negative, or neutral) of the coverage received by each candidate, which was analyzed only from January 1 to April 15. Framing refers to the media's tendency to select certain aspects of the campaign and make them more salient, as if to suggest what is important about presidential elections. Frames were determined by human coders. Tone was analyzed with a computerized content analysis program which recognizes positive, negative and neutral words and phrases. (When the tone of a sample of stories is coded by researchers, the computer and the human coders agree 97% of the time.)

As in previous elections, the media are framing the campaign as a horserace. Pew calls this the strategy frame, and it includes reports on momentum, polling, advertising and fundraising. This frame accounted for 64% of campaign stories. Critics charge that the strategy frame does not give voters the information they need to determine the candidates' positions on issues. That information is included in the categories of domestic issues, foreign issues and the candidate's public record, which collectively account for 16% of the coverage. (Of course, in Romney's case, his past public record is all but meaningless for determining his current position on issues.)

The tone of the news stories about Obama and Romney is summarized below:

	Romney	Obama
Positive	39%	18%
Neutral	29%	34%
Negative	32%	34%

Contrary to Romney's claims, he has received much more favorable coverage than President Obama. In fact, I find it hard to imagine that a sentient being could read, listen to or watch the corporate media and actually believe they favor the President.

As shown above, the tone of stories about Romney has changed over time. They became much more favorable after the Michigan primary on February 28, when it became clear that Romney would be the Elephant nominee. The coverage of President Obama, as you can see, has been unrelentingly negative throughout all 15 weeks of the survey.

My interpretation of these data is fairly straightforward. The owners of the corporate media in this country are overwhelmingly wealthy and politically conservative, and their preferences exert a compelling influence over the behavior of reporters and editors. Previous research has shown that the media traditionally favor candidates from the Elephant Party. This accounts for the negative tone of stories about Obama. Prior to February 28, the media owners were probably split over which Elephant candidate they preferred. As long as Gingrich and Santorum were in the race, they ran quite a few negative stories about Romney. However, once Romney's nomination was inevitable, media ownership closed ranks behind the nominee of their party.

I find it particularly interesting that the media frequently report charges of liberal bias made by Elephant candidates, but almost never report studies such as this one which exonerate them of the charge.

There is no reason to think that either the predominant use of the strategy frame or the tone of the coverage of the candidates will change for the remainder of the campaign. It is also likely that the media will continue to report whatever the candidates say without evaluating whether their statements are true or false, and that they will not investigate and report whether the candidates' current statements are consistent with their past public record. All of these policies will translate into a significant advantage for Romney.