Study: Campaign coverage still focuses on 'horse race'

News coverage of the 2008 presidential campaign has centered predominantly on just five candidates, offered very little information about their public records or what they would do in office, and focused more than 60% of stories on political and tactical aspects of the race, according to a joint study released on Oct. 29. The report, from the Project for Excellence in Journalism and the Joan Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics, and Public Policy at Harvard University also found that news outlets gave Barack Obama the most favorable treatment, while John McCain received the least favorable, but covered Democrats more than Republicans in general in the race for president. "Overall, Democrats also have received more positive coverage than Republicans (35% of stories vs. 26%), while Republicans received more negative coverage than Democrats (35% vs. 26%)," the study found. "For both parties, a plurality of stories, 39%, were neutral or balanced." Finally, researchers found that most voters are not getting the coverage they want, citing another survey that claims most citizens want more coverage of issues and candidates' history. "Even coverage of issues and candidate background was often cast through a political lens, frequently in the form of exploring the potential vulnerabilities of key candidates," the report stated. "For [Hillary] Clinton, this strategic focus translated into more coverage of her evolving stances on the Iraq War, something that created strains with elements of her party's more liberal base. For Giuliani it resulted in coverage of his position on abortion and his marriage history, two areas that raise questions about his chances with the conservative base of his party." The study reviewed 1,742 campaign stories that appeared between January and May 2007 in 48 different news outlets, which spanned print, online, network television, cable television, and radio. "In all, 63% of the campaign stories focused on political and tactical aspects of the campaign," results showed. "That is nearly four times the number of stories about the personal backgrounds of the candidates (17%) or the candidates' ideas and policy proposals (15%). And just one percent of stories examined the candidates' records or past public performance, the study found. "The press' focus on fundraising, tactics and polling is even more evident if one looks at how stories were framed rather than the topic of the story," the report adds. "Just 12% of stories examined were presented in a way that explained how citizens might be affected by the election, while nearly nine-out-of-ten stories (86%) focused on matters that largely impacted only the parties and the candidates. Those numbers, incidentally, match almost exactly the campaign-centric orientation of coverage found on the eve of the primaries eight years ago." The report noted that "all of these findings seem to be at sharp variance with what the public says it wants from campaign reporting." It referenced a new poll by The Pew Research Center for the People and the Press that found about 80% of Americans "say they want more coverage of the candidates' stances on issues, and majorities want more on the record and personal background, and backing of the candidates, more about lesser-known candidates and more about debates." Other findings in the new report: * "Five candidates have been the focus of more than half of all the coverage. Hillary Clinton received the most (17% of stories), though she can thank the overwhelming and largely negative attention of conservative talk radio hosts for much of the edge in total volume. Barack Obama was next (14%), with Republicans Giuliani, McCain, and Romney measurably behind (9% and 7% and 5% respectively). As for the rest of the pack, Elizabeth Edwards, a candidate spouse, received more attention than 10 of them, and nearly as much as her husband." * "Democrats generally got more coverage than Republicans, (49% of stories vs. 31%.) One reason was that major Democratic candidates began announcing their candidacies a month earlier than key Republicans, but that alone does not fully explain the discrepancy." * "Most of that difference in tone, however, can be attributed to the friendly coverage of Obama (47% positive) and the critical coverage of McCain (just 12% positive.) When those two candidates are removed from the field, the tone of coverage for the two parties is virtually identical." * "Newspapers were more positive than other media about Democrats and more citizen-oriented in framing stories. Talk radio was more negative about almost every candidate than any other outlet. Network television was more focused than other media on the personal backgrounds of candidates. For all sectors, however, strategy and horse race were front and center." The study also found that, during the first five months of 2007, the presidential campaign was the second-most covered news story of any in the press. "It lagged behind only the debate over the war in Iraq," the study revealed. The entire report can be found at www.journalism.org.