SMRs and AMRs

Wednesday, September 25, 2013

No, the media isn’t out to get poor Ted Cruz

By Jonathan Bernstein, WashPost, Updated: September 25, 2013

Republicans were quick to complain that the press didn’t sufficiently cover Ted Cruz’s speech — specifically claiming that the Wendy Davis filibuster in Texas received more and more favorable coverage.

The only problem? As far as more coverage is concerned, it simply wasn’t true, as both Philip Bump and Jason Linkins document in detail. Turns out it wasn’t close; whether it was live coverage on the cable news networks or newspaper coverage, Cruz was treated as a major story while Davis, well, wasn’t.

It gets worse. Politico media critic Dylan Byers focused more on the tone of the coverage, and took the side of conservatives, concluding that “part of the disparity in coverage is due to the fact that the mainstream media, generally speaking, don’t admire Cruz the way they admired Davis.”

Two problems with this. One is that most of the items Byers cites are from editorials or other places where we would expect opinions, including partisan opinions; it’s hardly interesting that liberal bloggers like Davis more than they like Cruz, or some sort of sign or improper “bias.” Most of us, when we’re concerned about media bias, care about whether the “neutral” press favors one party in their reporting, not what opinion-meisters say.

(More here.)

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home