Media Biased for Trump? Say it Ain’t So…

From: therightscoop.com,  by The Right Scoop,  on Apr 18, 2016,  see the article HERE.

images Cruz Kasich Trump

MRC: Which cable network has more TRUMP BIAS? Let’s take a look…

MRC (Media Research Center) did some in-depth research on how much airtime presidential candidates and their surrogates have been getting lately on the big three cable news networks. And you’ll be stunned, even flabbergasted at their results!

Ok no you won’t:

NEWSBUSTERS – A team of MRC analysts logged each prime time interview of a presidential candidate or a plainly-identified supporter or surrogate on CNN, MSNBC and the Fox News Channel over the past four weeks (March 21 to April 15, weekdays only), poring over approximately 240 hours of programming.

Our study found that FNC spent much more time interviewing Trump and his surrogates than either of his GOP competitors. Over the past four weeks, Trump was interviewed for a total of 178 minutes on Fox, vs. 106 minutes on CNN and 43 minutes on MSNBC. (Interviews includes network-sponsored town halls as well as sit-downs with a network host, but not debates or live coverage of rallies or speeches.)

Trump’s leading competitor, Texas Senator Ted Cruz, was featured in interviews totaling 120 minutes on FNC, slightly less than the 133 minutes he received on CNN, but much more than the 35 minutes he managed on MSNBC. The only other active candidate, Ohio Governor John Kasich, received 84 minutes on Fox, 106 minutes on CNN and 100 minutes on MSNBC.

Adding in the airtime for campaign surrogates (family members, campaign staff, or designated surrogates), Trump’s tally grows to 397 minutes on Fox, or nearly 60 percent of the total, compared to 164 minutes (25%) for Cruz and 105 minutes (16%) for Kasich.

gopcoveragechart

On CNN, Trump eclipsed Cruz by a much smaller margin: 331 minutes to 265 minutes, with 134 minutes for Kasich. On MSNBC, Kasich’s campaign actually took the most airtime during the four weeks we examined: 115 minutes, vs. 71 for Trump and 65 for Cruz.

The gap between Trump and his competitors on Fox might have been wider but for the fact that the campaign in early April moved from the Midwest to New York, where all three cable news operations are headquartered. During the first two weeks of our study, Trump and his surrogates claimed 214 minutes of airtime, vs. 62 minutes for Team Cruz and an even punier 24 minutes for Kasich’s crew.

But from April 4 to April 15, as the campaign in Wisconsin ended and the candidates moved east, Trump’s coverage ebbed slightly, to 183 minutes, while both Cruz and Kasich saw their face time on Fox expand — Cruz to 102 minutes, Kasich to 81.

The top surrogate for any candidate: conservative columnist and Trump supporter Kayleigh McEnany, who appeared on CNN for a total of 70 minutes during the four weeks we examined.

There’s obviously more to news coverage than just interviews, including day-to-day reporting and roundtables with the networks’ own pundits as well as non-aligned party members. But the tally of interview and town hall airtime shows, once again, that Donald Trump is getting the lion’s share of media attention this year.

~~~

Just think if they did this for the whole election cycle. It might look something like this:

 

gopcoveragechart_altered

If you get my drift.

~~~~~~~~~~

Once again, as it’s been since the beginning, Donald Trump gets the lion’s share of the airtime. He was given 48.5% of the airtime during that period. Cruz got 30% and Kasich got 21.5%. Why isn’t Trump raising hell about fairness now? That distribution of airtime was extremely unfair. Do you expect him to excoriate the cable networks for the imbalance in their coverage? Or should Cruz and Kasich complain that “it’s rigged”?

According to reports, Trump has received just short of $2 billion dollars in free airtime so far – and some wonder why he’s leading the pack.

Garnet92.



Categories: Political

Tags: ,

12 replies

  1. It figures Fox would be in the tank for him, but they’re still not as bad as Breitbart. Most any day you visit there, you’ll several headlines featuring Trump while Cruz gets the smaller window near the bottom of the page. One day there were seven for Trump to Cruz’ one.

    Like

    • We’re actually watching the “Frog Soup” mechanism in play. at first the water was cool and refreshing, then cozy and warm, and in the blink of an eye, we were frog soup. They kinda sneaked up on me. I think the transition was gradual, like frog soup. Well, I don’t like frog soup so I think that I’ll stay away.

      Like

  2. Very little of the coverage Trump is still getting is critical of him, and to the extent that it is, very few follow-up questions are asked and certainly they let him skate on the substance of policy matters. This whole thing could have been avoided had greed not taken over the “conservative” TV media and had so many so-called conservatives in Talk radio spent more time paying attention to the alarms that were sounding when Trump was blatantly undermining his own positions last summer, flipping and flopping like a net full of fresh caught Mackerel on virtually every issue. One host banned me from his fb site for strenuously criticizing his soft-ball approach to Trump. All Trump had to do to get favorable treatment was to pretend he and his family were loyal listeners. Critical thinking and fair but tough interviews went out the window. And don’t even get me started on shills like Sean Hannity and Fox “News”, Matt Drudge or the fools over at Breitbart. Nope, none want to admit it, but they are as responsible for this monster as any of the usual liberal-media. And who among them is humble enough to think their audience may be more objectively wise than they? As for me, though I initially supported him as my second choice, I made up my mind against Trump last year by August.

    Like

    • Yep, it’s the same way they treat Hillary. If it’s detrimental, they shit-can it, if it makes their preferred individual look good, they highlight it. Same-ol, same-ol.

      Actually, to a great degree, the media is to blame for a lot of our ills. The inert public who only gets their news from these outlets assumes that they’re getting actual real news and acts accordingly. We need to “reorganize” the media as much as government.

      Like

    • So true, Aftershock. The media treats Trump much like they’ve treated Hillary forever and O for the past near 8 years – like royalty rather than a public servant. The rules don’t apply to them. It seems like much of that started back when they started doing analysis of the news, rather than just reporting the facts, statements, etc.

      Observations tells us that it’s probably not even necessary to guess which site banned you.

      Like

  3. Excellent graphs. Thanks, Garnet. It’s interesting that with the disparaging media time Cruz is where he is! He’s going to be our 45th.

    Like

    • So true! Cruz has been battling headwinds ever since he announced – everything from his Canadian birth to being an outcast in the Senate among his own party. He is a strong, determined, intelligent man – EXACTLY what we NEED in the White House. As opposed to a boastful, inarticulate, snake-oil salesman.

      Liked by 1 person

  4. There’s a good reason why the media is often called the fourth branch of government. They have an enormous amount of power for which they are almost entirely unaccountable. Ironically CNN’s coverage, at least according to the graph, appears to be the least biased. We wouldn’t expect John Kasich with his nil chance of being the nominee to be as newsworthy as Trump, who leads the polls and delegate tallies, and by that logic Cruz should be commanding slightly less news time than Trump. Fox, which has devoted too much time to the front runner, and MSNBC, which has given the lion’s share of time to the candidate with the least support by far, are clearly showing their biases.

    What are you going to do? The “news” is, was, and always has been biased. That’s inescapable. Just remember that even though Trump is getting more air time that’s not always a good thing, given that his mouth has no check valve on it. I think the more people get to see the real Donald Trump, the better off the other candidates probably are.

    The real bias is better measured by the non-interview coverage where the producers and reporters of the news are better able to put their own slant on things by giving more or less coverage to negative and positive stories according to their own biases. This is where the real manipulations take place, and that’s been proven time and again. The Drudge Report, for example, has been so blatantly biased for Trump that I’ve stopped checking it.

    Like

    • ” I think the more people get to see the real Donald Trump, the better off the other candidates probably are.”

      CW, I think that concept is true now, but it decidedly wasn’t true when there was a very large field during a part of the nomination season where victory by plurality gave that winner ALL of the delegates, like Florida & South Carolina, which were huge prizes..Meanwhile, Cruz got 48% in Texas, but didn’t get them all!

      Like

    • The coverage distribution surprised me. I’ve had the feeling that Fox News has embraced Trump lately, but I didn’t know by how much. The figures will help me to spend more time on CNN than previously. O’Reilly has always been soft on Trump and Hannity has as well, so I guess that Megyn was the only one that didn’t “coddle The Doddald.”

      Trump has racked up support on a number of the Internet news sites that I usually frequent, like Breitbart and Drudge – and I used to like Breitbart. I think that a lot of that is due to them thinking that Trump has this all wrapped up and they want to be associated with a winner – especially that they know how Trump treats those he believes “slighted” him.

      Like

  5. This was and is the secret of his success thus far. He has masterfully created free media access as a “newsmaker”, then got the chance to respond to any critiques by his multiple competitors. When the field was large, almost everyone but Cruz was reacting to him. Those other respondents got slimed, and destroyed, by Trump’s media broadsides allowing Cruz to survive. Rubio should have pulled out earlier, and we’d have an even tighter race.

    Like

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: