Posted on 10/22/2014 6:24:06 PM PDT by xzins
It is probably safe to assume that you have been following the midterm elections closely. You decided to click on this link, which would indicate that you have at least a passing interest in the coming national vote in which Americans will determine which party controls the upper chamber of Congress for the remainder of the Obama presidency. If, however, you have been closely following the coverage of the coming midterms, you might have noticed that network news outlets do not appear to share your enthusiasm. You’re not imagining things.
According to an exhaustive study performed by Media Research Center analysts, between September 1 and October 20, the three major broadcast networks only bothered to mention the fact that there is a critical election coming up only 25 times. Of those mentions, only 16 of them were in the context of packaged report.
By contrast, in the same period in 2006, when Democrats were believed to be likely to take control of both the House and Senate, the three major networks mentioned the coming midterms 159 times with 91 of those mentions broadcast as part of detailed reports.
2006, 2014
“Amazingly, since September 1 ABC’s newly-renamed World News Tonight has yet to feature a single mention of this year’s campaign, let alone a full story, the MRC report revealed. “In contrast, eight years ago ABC’s World News aired 36 stories that discussed that year’s midterm campaign, including a weekly Thursday night feature that then-anchor Charlie Gibson promised would look at the ‘critical races.’”
“CBS and NBC have scarcely been more comprehensive,” the expose continued. “In 2006, CBS aired a total of 58 evening news stories that discussed the campaign, while NBC Nightly News aired 65 stories. This year, those numbers have fallen to just 14 and 11 as of October 20, declines of 76% and 83%, respectively.”
MRC did not investigate how the press covered the 2010 midterm cycle, when Republicans were believed to be in a competitive position to retake control of the House if not the U.S. Senate, but I would guess that there was more substantial coverage of that race in the nightly network newscasts than there has been in 2014. Perhaps the coverage disparity has something to do with the fact that the outcome in the 2006 race – a Republican loss of control of both chambers – was widely expected for months ahead of the vote.
That attempt to exculpate the media does not hold water. The potential for juicy speculation provided to broadcast news editors and story planners by the prospect of flipping the House and/or Senate is just as potent today as it was in 2006 or 2010. There is no reason why the nightly newscasts would deprive their combined 23 million nightly viewers of details on the coming race unless broadcast news editors and producers were equally unenthusiastic about the coming election. Or, more accurately, the likely blunting effect the coming vote will have on Barack Obama’s waning efficacy in office.
No news is (no news)
The Main Stream media hopes that if they don’t mention the election, many folks will forget about it and the only substantial block of actual voters will be those the ‘RATS bus to the polls.
The only ones who will forget about it are the ones we don’t want to vote anyway. This could work out well.
good...left wingers are nothing more than parrots and robots so maybe they’ll stay home thinking the election was cancelled...
I don’t understand how ABC News has managed to have ZERO segments on the mid-term elections. In some parallel universe that has to be fraud.
You could fill that studio with other 800-pounders like IRS, open southern border, “red lines”, Ebola ad nauseam.
“The only ones who will forget about it are the ones we don’t want to vote anyway. This could work out well.”
I agree. Who watches the LS media, libs or conservatives? Who watches Fox? This could work out real well. Let’s just not have any Ferguson news before election day.
If you know what to look for, the propaganda media tells you what is really happening. Maybe things are better than I think.
Editors rule the world.
bm
Good. The low information Democrat voters will not know there is an election.
It is ‘da woild’ against Mary Landrieu!
It is time to send Obamacare Mary/Katrina Mary/Spawn of another dynasty Mary/Blonde from Dah Chawklit City Mary, packing!
After the pre-recorded in Shreveport/broadcast Statewide on PBS (with a noticeable time delay between lips moving and the words coming from the TV) last Sunday afternoon, I am re-evaluating whom i will be choosing in the early elections that started on Tuesday. (It’s either i pay bus fare, to go to the Parish courthouse for early voting, OR, I pay cabfare back and forth from a deep-in-the-back-neck-of-the-woods-without-bus-service high school.)
They don’t have to as long as the bosses know there’s one. I ordered an absentee ballot this year to see how it works. They sent it to the house. I had to put in the barest info and then sign it, seal it, send it.
The bosses get their list of 1000 names, they send in for ballots, they arrive in the mail, and then they guy has a month to have about 10 helpers go to each house to fill it out and get it signed. That’s about 3 a night, so in reality, only 1 or 2 houses.
I think ABC News has a cable channel now, but literally nobody watches it.
lol
They won’t be forced to talk about scandals.
They’re running out of “two-minutes hate” segments.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.