Is Newspaper Coverage of Economic Events Politically Biased?

Social Science Research Network ^ | 9/13/04 | John Lott and Kevin Hassett

[jnmitch]

Accusations of political bias in the media are often made by members of both political parties, yet there have been few systematic studies of such bias to date. This paper develops an econometric technique to test for political bias in news reports that controls for the underlying character of the news reported. Our results suggest that American newspapers tend to give more positive news coverage to the same economic news when Democrats are in the Presidency than for Republicans. When all types of news are pooled into a single analysis, our results are highly significant. However, the results vary greatly depending upon which economic numbers are being reported. When GDP growth is reported, Republicans received between 16 and 24 percentage point fewer positive stories for the same economic numbers than Democrats. For durable goods for all newspapers, Republicans received between 15 and 25 percentage points fewer positive news stories than Democrats. For unemployment, the difference was between zero and 21 percentage points. Retail sales showed no difference. Among the Associated Press and the top 10 papers, the Washington Post, Chicago Tribune, Associated Press, and New York Times tend to be the least likely to report positive news during Republican administrations, while the Houston Chronicle slightly favors Republicans. Only one newspaper treated one Republican administration significantly more positively than the Clinton administration: the Los Angeles Times' headlines were most favorable to the Reagan administration, but it still favored Clinton over either Bush administration. We also find that the media coverage affects people's perceptions of the economy. Contrary to the typical impression that bad news sells, we find that good economic news generates more news coverage and that it is usually covered more prominently.

[pikachu]

The lame stream media seem to believe WBHIABFA -- Why be fair? it is all Bush's fault anyway -- And did you know John Kerry was in Vietnam (and Cambodia)?

[wideawake]

Is Newspaper Coverage of the Racist and Homophobic Republican Party Politically Biased?

[VisualizeSmallerGovernment]

When the stock market went up under Reagan, it was the era of Greed and Selfishness.

When the stock market went up under Clinton, it was an era of unprecedented peace and prosperity.

Right now the Democrats can't even make up their mind on whether they want oil to be cheap or expensive. Whatever the direction, it's Bush's fault and HE MUST BE STOPPED!

[Calvin Locke]

Remember that Clinton speech in which he admitted he raised taxes too much? Only one reporter(ette) put it in her story.

And iirc, she was from Reuters, of all news outlets.

[Mogollon]

Well let's see. Unemployment under clintoon = 5.6% good, unemployment under Bush = 5.4% bad. etc....etc..

[cobaltblu]

Do you think this article will show up in your local paper? It sure won't in mine.

[Grampa Dave]

Two of the main so called economic news houses are CBS and Reuters. They go out of their way to make any economic good news appear to be bad news.


One way to spot an embedden Gloom and Doom economic news troll on Free Republic is their constant posting of the phoney bads news from CBS and Reuters with the same bs from the NY Slimes and Washington Compost.

[The Ghost of FReepers Past]

Interesting angle.

[driftless]

Yes, but when you mention that stat, the libs always respond with "well, what kind of jobs are those...burger flipping ones?" Of course they never ask that question during Dem admins.

In my modest view, the main rags are so biased towards Dems that it shouldn't even be a question. Part of it is because Dems and libs are ignoramuses about how wealth is created, and part of it is simple bias. Put the two together and you have Big Media. I'm sure many of BM's cohorts and cadres firmly believe that wealth is created by some people in the back rooms of government bureaucracies who mumble incantations and move objects around the ouija board.

And there are those libs who just think that wealth just happens, and those nasty, dirty Republicans got there first and took most of it before the Dems could get there. I've actually read a column by a lib writer named Barbara Reynolds who propounded just that theory. But she was so wacky and paranoid that even the lib paper, The St. Paul Pioneer Press, who printed her garbage eventually dropped her.

[SWO]

It showed up in the New York Times. 50% was a summary, without examples, and the rest was folks explaining how they didn't trust John Lott, noted pro-gun madman, and pseudonymous blogger that he is