Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Latest Breaking News

Showing Original Post only (View all)

TomCADem

(17,387 posts)
Wed Dec 7, 2016, 11:25 PM Dec 2016

Study: negative media coverage of Clinton soared in the last two weeks of the campaign [View all]

Source: Vox

Ten of America’s most prominent media outlets ramped up their negative coverage of Hillary Clinton in the final two weeks of the presidential campaign while also writing fewer positive stories about her, according to a new report released today by Harvard University researchers.

From late September to the middle of October — around the time of the presidential debates — the ratio of critical coverage of Clinton was roughly three positive stories for every two negative ones.

But as the election headed to a close, that gap dramatically widened. In the final two weeks, there were closer to seven negative pieces about Clinton for every two positive pieces, according to the report from Harvard’s Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics, and Public Policy.

Of course, part of that change was driven by new facts on the ground — like the revelations about the FBI’s decision to briefly reopen an investigation into Clinton’s private email server, and the WikiLeaks disclosures — that Donald Trump voters may regard as legitimate reasons for more negative stories. But whatever the cause, according to the Harvard report, talk of Clinton’s alleged scandals hit their peak right before Election Day.

Read more: http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2016/12/7/13872580/media-coverage-presidential-election



New study from Harvard confirms how the election was corrupted by a combination of FBI meddling in the election along with Russian sourced disclosures to wikileaks.
24 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
That was obvious nt doc03 Dec 2016 #1
This was orchestrated. raging moderate Dec 2016 #2
Te difference is the Cliintons were accused, the Con was actually guilty. nt napi21 Dec 2016 #3
Looking at all that has happened, I'm sure it was. Hortensis Dec 2016 #23
No kidding. It started when MSNBC first LIED about the Comey letter to the republicans still_one Dec 2016 #4
That is the last 11 days to be exact world wide wally Dec 2016 #9
yup still_one Dec 2016 #12
water is wet. just so obvious. Media owned by wealthy right wingers. THIS is our big issue! NRaleighLiberal Dec 2016 #5
If we had nominated Sanders or O'Malley the GOP would have made up fake scandals against them, StevieM Dec 2016 #6
Even More Likely, Trump's Russian Friends Would Hack and Leak Bernie Campaign Emails... TomCADem Dec 2016 #8
Yup. La Lioness Priyanka Dec 2016 #13
+1 uponit7771 Dec 2016 #22
Media like new shiny things to cover. moondust Dec 2016 #7
But the GOP joewicker_TX Dec 2016 #10
The Fawning Corporate Media strikes again! shadowmayor Dec 2016 #11
Clinton lost the Presidency just because of the negative stories about FBI and the email server andym Dec 2016 #14
The media were played this election. Mr. Sparkle Dec 2016 #15
Nice to see a study confirm what we lived through-saw, and heard. riversedge Dec 2016 #16
Brought to us by the Bureau Of Painfully Obvious Facts. (nt) Paladin Dec 2016 #17
And Fat Bastard chewed out CNN and the other media execs one week after the election Kolesar Dec 2016 #18
So what % was manipulation by the FBI vs Russian? YOHABLO Dec 2016 #19
Trump had months of negative coverage right up to the election killbotfactory Dec 2016 #20
Really? graegoyle Dec 2016 #24
thank you liberal fucking media orleans Dec 2016 #21
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Study: negative media cov...