Debra J. Caruso on Obama's Press Coverage |
|
OurBlook interview with Debra J. Caruso, founder of DJC Communications in New York City. Questions are on the latest study by the Center for Media and Public Affairs on press coverage of President Obama ... http://www.cmpa.com/media_room_9_14_09.html.
What do you think of the study's basic finding that press coverage of President Obama has dropped from 59 percent positive during his first 100 days to 43 percent in the period since then? Are you surprised?
DC: No. When a president's ratings are high, as they were when President Obama first took office, the media generally becomes more critical. If you add the negative coverage from the general media to the expected critical coverage from Fox, the result will naturally be negative overall. The study did not include CNN, MSNBC, the Washington Post, Los Angeles Times and other big city papers, which may have balanced things out.
The study then measures positive and negative coverage of him on various issues. Do any of those findings jump out at you?
DC: The findings on foreign policy are somewhat surprising, but those were the least covered issues, meaning the smaller sample of stories has skewed the results.
(Editor's note: Obama got the least favorable coverage in the foreign affairs arena ... stories on his policies on Israel and the Middle East were only 30 percent positive, and Afghanistan 29 percent.)
Coverage of Obama in the New York Times, however, has been consistently favorable. Your reaction?
DC: The Times has a reputation for being left of center which would be consistent with the study's findings. I would have preferred, however, to read that the coverage from the Times was 50/50.
Coverage of Obama in Fox's "Special Report" has been consistently unfavorable. Your reaction?
DC: The Fox slogan that its coverage "fair and balanced" is just that, a slogan.
About the same time, a new Pew Research Center for the People & the Press media attitudes survey came out. It found that public trust in the major broadcast and print media is at an all-time low ever since such polls began in 1985. In particular, it found a big plunge in the most recent two years ... in July 2007, 39 percent of the respondents thought the media got the facts straight, compared to only 29 percent this time around. http://people-press.org/report/543/ . Your thoughts?
DC: There has been a huge movement among the conservative radio talk show hosts and conservative networks to discredit the mainstream media. It is no surprise that the vast number of Americans who follow these outlets have been swayed.
Going beyond these statistics, just from your own reading of newspapers and viewing of TV news, what is your opinion of the quality of coverage of Obama and the administration that you see?
DC: I think the major broadcast networks, CNN, the Times and other major newspapers have been generally fair. On other cable outlets, there are specific broadcasters/hosts who openly favor the president and others who overtly disparage him. I do think the blatant favoritism as well as the openly harsh criticism are inappropriate.
Do you see any contrast between the press' general coverage of Obama and its general coverage of Bush and his administration?
DC: Presidents are naturally vulnerable to negative press. President Bush received a great deal of negative coverage, likewise with President Obama. Is there anything else you'd like to say on this issue?
DC: I would like to see more far-reaching polls like this one and better publicity for them. If the public realized and reacted to anything short of fair coverage, they would be better served.
Editor's Note: Ms. Caruso is a former NYC radio news producer and on-air reporter.
Set as favorite
Bookmark
Email this
Hits: 583 Trackback(0)
Comments (0)
 Write comment
|
TrackBack URI for this entry
| Related Items |
|---|