NEWSFLASH: Most coverage of Bush is negative...

Actually, at first this seems like nothing more than another "duh" story, but then if the Washington Times doesn't report it, who will?

More than two-thirds of the news stories on ABC, NBC and CBS covering the first 100 days of Mr. Bush's second term were negative, according to an analysis released today by the District-based Center for Media and Public Affairs (CMPA).

It's actually a slight improvement: During the first 100 days of his initial term in office, the coverage was 71 percent negative, according to a similar CMPA study conducted in 2001.

I love the rationale the CMPA gives: "Presidents tend to get bad coverage during their second terms. The press is sick of them by then." But they were less negative than his first term? Here's the scoop: Networks were sick of Bush before any votes were cast in 2000.

Who was the worst? ABC with 78% negative. No surprise there.

So over the last six months, the economy is racing along at a brisk pace with steady growth and unemployment down to 5%. The Iraqis come out in huge numbers to peacefully vote for a new government and are gradually taking control over their own security. America continues to be successfully shielded from any terrorist attacks.

And four out five Bush stories out of ABC are negative? Gee, no bias there.

Posted by: Gary at 09:05 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 239 words, total size 2 kb.