Study: Media favored Kerry in early October:

New Study Finds Media Favored Kerry in First Two Weeks of October

By Editor & Publisher Staff

Published: October 26, 2004

(snip)
NEW YORK A new study for the non-partisan Project for Excellence in Journalism suggests that in the first two weeks of October, during the period of the presidential debates, George W. Bush received much more unfavorable media coverage than Sen. John Kerry.

In the overall sample (which included four newspapers, two cable news networks and the four leading broadcast networks), more than half of all Bush stories were negative in tone, during this period. One-quarter of all Kerry stories were negative, according to the study.

"This is the mirror image of what happened four years ago," the report states, when Bush benefited from coverage in the same period, enjoying twice as many positive stories. (snip)

More here: http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000685127

IS IT POSSIBLE THIS WAS SO BECAUSE BUSH SUCKED SO BADLY IN THE DEBATES?????????

The first debate made Bush look deficient in capability.

If one candidate is royally screwing up more than the other, shouldn't the press reflect this? Instead they feel like they have to give a 50/50 split regardless of how much shit is hitting the fan.

:D

A Positive story for Kerry would be they were not bashing him.

Of course their results would come out as it did.

would it be because the coverage is biased or they are a bad football team with a 1-5 record?

We're 1-6

First of all this was the only time I've noticed the media treating Kerry halfway decent since the beginning of the summer.

Secondly, Bush is the bigger liar, has been a failure and does not deserve to be re-elected.

What are they supposed to make up stories about Kerry to balance out Bush's negative stories?

Please, Bush should be concerned when they start covering all his failures.

The only source in the media that has gone after Bush hard from day one of this race is the New York Times.

Kerry has been under assault from a much larger variety of News sources.

And Bush* sucking a lot.

There's no way to balance out some things.

"These judgments, however, are based on just four not very typical newspapers in a not very typical period of the presidential race." Who reads these days? Not the pResident or most of his fans. Probably not a lot of others either.

These folks are just creating the justification and rationalization republicans need to change the subject now to blame the media to boost Bush poll numbers. Blame it on the media. Not on the fact he is a moron!

We all know the stories about Kerry for months were spun in the white house basement and promoted on the news networks with little or no fact checking and with damning effect I might add. (stories they call positive hmmm)

Kerry was being called a flip flopper and worse, just like the paid B/C advertising. Bush was the resolute and decisive leader who was resolute and decisive in the debates... just that he lost them all. Even tho he lost the debates, he was promoted as decisive and effective.

I guarantee you this is a biased spin that plays a part in some Rovian plan being executed right now...

In a way this simply reinforces the FACT that the Media is hopelessly GOP-friendly and a corporate tool.

Media harps on Lesbian Daughter but largely ignores Bush lying in the debate saying he never said "Bin Laden not a focus".

and who is responsible for this hm, let me see. failed three debates, had a box on his back, iraq a mess and cheney saying going swimmingly well, 400 tons of explosives disappear.

reality, there is tons more they could be saying about bush. what do they have on kerry

cant do flip flop. the teresa is rich stuff, well kerry took care of that in speech 3 and swift boats have rans it course. oh ya, kerry said lesbian. bad kerry, bad

how about this 'tone:' ppphhhtttt.

"Jon, the facts in Iraq have an anti-Bush bias!"