ADVERTISEMENT

Coverage of Trump, Harris in presidential race 'most lopsided in history,' 85% negative for Trump: report

Sullivan

HB Heisman
Nov 24, 2001
7,549
2,287
113

Coverage of Trump, Harris in presidential race 'most lopsided in history,' 85% negative for Trump: report​


Coverage on ABC, CBS and NBC News of the presidential race between former President Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris has been the most "lopsided in history," a new study released one week before the election found.

Analysis from the Media Research Center (MRC) published Monday found that Harris has received 78% positive coverage on broadcast evening news since July, versus Trump, who has been the subject of 85% negative coverage on the same networks

"The difference in coverage between the two candidates is far greater than in 2016, when both Trump and then-challenger Hillary Clinton received mostly negative coverage [91% negative for Trump, vs. 79% negative for Clinton,]" according to MRC analysts.

The disparity between the Trump and Harris coverage is even greater than in 2020, "when Joe Biden was treated to 66% positive coverage, vs. 92% negative for Trump," the study reads.

MRC reported that ABC, CBS and NBC have spent more than 200 minutes of airtime, most of it negative, harping on controversies surrounding Trump while glossing over or, in many cases, outright ignoring controversies related to Harris - such as plagiarism accusations and allegations surrounding her husband, Doug Emhoff.

"Instead, Harris’ coverage has been larded with enthusiastic quotes from pro-Harris voters, creating a positive ‘vibe’ for the Democrat even as network reporters criticize Trump themselves," MRC writes.

Analysts reviewed more than 600 segments about the presidential race that aired on ABC, CBS or NBC beginning on the day President Biden suspended his candidacy in late July, through October 25.

After weeks of glowing coverage for Harris as the Democratic nominee, the three networks seemingly changed their tone following the debate between Harris and Trump in September, the MRC analysts found.

"The networks shifted attention away from Harris, spending significantly more airtime targeting Trump," the report reads.

"From the date Harris entered the race on July 21 through September 10, she received 353 minutes of network evening news coverage, virtually identical to the 355 minutes given Trump during the same period. Since then, however, TV has focused nearly twice as much attention on Trump as Harris: 398 minutes for the former President, compared to just 230 minutes for the Vice President," the study found.

"The additional airtime for Trump was hardly meant as a gift. Instead, it reflected the networks’ intensive focus on Trump controversies, providing opportunities for negative news coverage," according to MRC.

Roughly 31% of the 753 minutes of evening news spent on Trump since July 21 spotlighted his personal controversies, the study found. "This compares to barely five percent of Harris’s airtime [28 minutes, out of a total 583 minutes of coverage] spent on similar topics.

The networks repeatedly cited January 6 and Trump’s claim that the 2020 election was rigged while labeling him as a "danger to democracy," MRC reported.

Comparatively, "Harris faced no such onslaught. Over fourteen weeks, evening news viewers heard a scant 5 minutes, 22 seconds of GOP criticisms that she’s too liberal, barely one-sixth the airtime spent on the claim Trump is a ‘fascist.’ None of this coverage included any criticisms of Harris from either network reporters or nonpartisan sources," MRC analysts found.


"Add it all up, and the media coverage of the past three months is more lopsided than that of any presidential election in the modern media age," the report reads.

"So if Donald Trump regains the White House next week, the media’s campaign against him will have accomplished nothing, except the further erosion of their own reputations."

The MRC findings come shortly after a Gallup study revealed that trust remains both historically and consistently low in the media. Only 31% of those polled expressed a "great deal" or "fair amount" of faith in the media to report news properly.

"For the third consecutive year, more U.S. adults have no trust at all in the media (36%) than trust it a great deal or fair amount. Another 33% of Americans express ‘not very much’ confidence," Gallup Senior Editor Megan Brenan wrote.

ABC, CBS and NBC News did not respond to Fox News Digital's request for comment.

 
Negative coverage is typical of anyone who is racist, sexist, a felon, crude, philandering, mean, lying, nasty person. Combine all in one person, and yep, it's going to lead to lots of negative coverage.
 
Last edited:
There will be someone who chimes in here and says the 85% negative coverage for Trump is too low. Book it.

When the coverage is this lopsided, at what point does it amount to election interference?
MSM is the propaganda arm of the Dem party and they don't try to hide it but that hardly qualifies as interference.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KFsdisciple
If I say Trump was found liable for sexual assault is that negative? If I say he allowed racist jokes at his rally is that negative? If I say he is a convicted felon is that negative?

If you don’t want negative press don’t do negative things.

Accountability used to matter to the GOP. Y’all have lost your way. You celebrate the negativity in your rallies then turn around and complain when the majority of Americans think it is awful.

It’s honestly weird.
 
Trump and Vance have stuck their feet in their mouths much more than Harris in the last 2 months. Add in Trumps history, still saying he won an election, lying at every turn, a reliable news agency would bring that up. But yes please tell me they aren’t being fair. Then I would counter with Fox is the most watched station and those numbers are completely flipped. So is Fox committing election interference? LOL
 

Coverage of Trump, Harris in presidential race 'most lopsided in history,' 85% negative for Trump: report​


Coverage on ABC, CBS and NBC News of the presidential race between former President Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris has been the most "lopsided in history," a new study released one week before the election found.

Analysis from the Media Research Center (MRC) published Monday found that Harris has received 78% positive coverage on broadcast evening news since July, versus Trump, who has been the subject of 85% negative coverage on the same networks

"The difference in coverage between the two candidates is far greater than in 2016, when both Trump and then-challenger Hillary Clinton received mostly negative coverage [91% negative for Trump, vs. 79% negative for Clinton,]" according to MRC analysts.

The disparity between the Trump and Harris coverage is even greater than in 2020, "when Joe Biden was treated to 66% positive coverage, vs. 92% negative for Trump," the study reads.

MRC reported that ABC, CBS and NBC have spent more than 200 minutes of airtime, most of it negative, harping on controversies surrounding Trump while glossing over or, in many cases, outright ignoring controversies related to Harris - such as plagiarism accusations and allegations surrounding her husband, Doug Emhoff.

"Instead, Harris’ coverage has been larded with enthusiastic quotes from pro-Harris voters, creating a positive ‘vibe’ for the Democrat even as network reporters criticize Trump themselves," MRC writes.

Analysts reviewed more than 600 segments about the presidential race that aired on ABC, CBS or NBC beginning on the day President Biden suspended his candidacy in late July, through October 25.

After weeks of glowing coverage for Harris as the Democratic nominee, the three networks seemingly changed their tone following the debate between Harris and Trump in September, the MRC analysts found.

"The networks shifted attention away from Harris, spending significantly more airtime targeting Trump," the report reads.

"From the date Harris entered the race on July 21 through September 10, she received 353 minutes of network evening news coverage, virtually identical to the 355 minutes given Trump during the same period. Since then, however, TV has focused nearly twice as much attention on Trump as Harris: 398 minutes for the former President, compared to just 230 minutes for the Vice President," the study found.

"The additional airtime for Trump was hardly meant as a gift. Instead, it reflected the networks’ intensive focus on Trump controversies, providing opportunities for negative news coverage," according to MRC.

Roughly 31% of the 753 minutes of evening news spent on Trump since July 21 spotlighted his personal controversies, the study found. "This compares to barely five percent of Harris’s airtime [28 minutes, out of a total 583 minutes of coverage] spent on similar topics.

The networks repeatedly cited January 6 and Trump’s claim that the 2020 election was rigged while labeling him as a "danger to democracy," MRC reported.

Comparatively, "Harris faced no such onslaught. Over fourteen weeks, evening news viewers heard a scant 5 minutes, 22 seconds of GOP criticisms that she’s too liberal, barely one-sixth the airtime spent on the claim Trump is a ‘fascist.’ None of this coverage included any criticisms of Harris from either network reporters or nonpartisan sources," MRC analysts found.


"Add it all up, and the media coverage of the past three months is more lopsided than that of any presidential election in the modern media age," the report reads.

"So if Donald Trump regains the White House next week, the media’s campaign against him will have accomplished nothing, except the further erosion of their own reputations."

The MRC findings come shortly after a Gallup study revealed that trust remains both historically and consistently low in the media. Only 31% of those polled expressed a "great deal" or "fair amount" of faith in the media to report news properly.

"For the third consecutive year, more U.S. adults have no trust at all in the media (36%) than trust it a great deal or fair amount. Another 33% of Americans express ‘not very much’ confidence," Gallup Senior Editor Megan Brenan wrote.

ABC, CBS and NBC News did not respond to Fox News Digital's request for comment.

You're so close to getting it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BGHAWK
From media research center website.

Media Research Center
Since 1987, the Media Research Center has worked successfully to expose and counter the leftist bias of the national news media


I suspect their study design and biases may be influencing their results.
 

Coverage of Trump, Harris in presidential race 'most lopsided in history,' 85% negative for Trump: report​


Coverage on ABC, CBS and NBC News of the presidential race between former President Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris has been the most "lopsided in history," a new study released one week before the election found.

Analysis from the Media Research Center (MRC) published Monday found that Harris has received 78% positive coverage on broadcast evening news since July, versus Trump, who has been the subject of 85% negative coverage on the same networks

"The difference in coverage between the two candidates is far greater than in 2016, when both Trump and then-challenger Hillary Clinton received mostly negative coverage [91% negative for Trump, vs. 79% negative for Clinton,]" according to MRC analysts.

The disparity between the Trump and Harris coverage is even greater than in 2020, "when Joe Biden was treated to 66% positive coverage, vs. 92% negative for Trump," the study reads.

MRC reported that ABC, CBS and NBC have spent more than 200 minutes of airtime, most of it negative, harping on controversies surrounding Trump while glossing over or, in many cases, outright ignoring controversies related to Harris - such as plagiarism accusations and allegations surrounding her husband, Doug Emhoff.

"Instead, Harris’ coverage has been larded with enthusiastic quotes from pro-Harris voters, creating a positive ‘vibe’ for the Democrat even as network reporters criticize Trump themselves," MRC writes.

Analysts reviewed more than 600 segments about the presidential race that aired on ABC, CBS or NBC beginning on the day President Biden suspended his candidacy in late July, through October 25.

After weeks of glowing coverage for Harris as the Democratic nominee, the three networks seemingly changed their tone following the debate between Harris and Trump in September, the MRC analysts found.

"The networks shifted attention away from Harris, spending significantly more airtime targeting Trump," the report reads.

"From the date Harris entered the race on July 21 through September 10, she received 353 minutes of network evening news coverage, virtually identical to the 355 minutes given Trump during the same period. Since then, however, TV has focused nearly twice as much attention on Trump as Harris: 398 minutes for the former President, compared to just 230 minutes for the Vice President," the study found.

"The additional airtime for Trump was hardly meant as a gift. Instead, it reflected the networks’ intensive focus on Trump controversies, providing opportunities for negative news coverage," according to MRC.

Roughly 31% of the 753 minutes of evening news spent on Trump since July 21 spotlighted his personal controversies, the study found. "This compares to barely five percent of Harris’s airtime [28 minutes, out of a total 583 minutes of coverage] spent on similar topics.

The networks repeatedly cited January 6 and Trump’s claim that the 2020 election was rigged while labeling him as a "danger to democracy," MRC reported.

Comparatively, "Harris faced no such onslaught. Over fourteen weeks, evening news viewers heard a scant 5 minutes, 22 seconds of GOP criticisms that she’s too liberal, barely one-sixth the airtime spent on the claim Trump is a ‘fascist.’ None of this coverage included any criticisms of Harris from either network reporters or nonpartisan sources," MRC analysts found.


"Add it all up, and the media coverage of the past three months is more lopsided than that of any presidential election in the modern media age," the report reads.

"So if Donald Trump regains the White House next week, the media’s campaign against him will have accomplished nothing, except the further erosion of their own reputations."

The MRC findings come shortly after a Gallup study revealed that trust remains both historically and consistently low in the media. Only 31% of those polled expressed a "great deal" or "fair amount" of faith in the media to report news properly.

"For the third consecutive year, more U.S. adults have no trust at all in the media (36%) than trust it a great deal or fair amount. Another 33% of Americans express ‘not very much’ confidence," Gallup Senior Editor Megan Brenan wrote.

ABC, CBS and NBC News did not respond to Fox News Digital's request for comment.

Someone needs to tell Rico to get off his burner account.

Nobody links MSN to a post like Rico
 
Trump and Vance have stuck their feet in their mouths much more than Harris in the last 2 months. Add in Trumps history, still saying he won an election, lying at every turn, a reliable news agency would bring that up. But yes please tell me they aren’t being fair. Then I would counter with Fox is the most watched station and those numbers are completely flipped. So is Fox committing election interference? LOL
That’s likely because Trump & Vance aren’t afraid of speaking to the media…all media. Whereas, Kamala tried hiding from the media and when finally called out…she mainly just did “friendly” interviews.
 

Coverage of Trump, Harris in presidential race 'most lopsided in history,' 85% negative for Trump: report​


Coverage on ABC, CBS and NBC News of the presidential race between former President Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris has been the most "lopsided in history," a new study released one week before the election found.

Analysis from the Media Research Center (MRC) published Monday found that Harris has received 78% positive coverage on broadcast evening news since July, versus Trump, who has been the subject of 85% negative coverage on the same networks

"The difference in coverage between the two candidates is far greater than in 2016, when both Trump and then-challenger Hillary Clinton received mostly negative coverage [91% negative for Trump, vs. 79% negative for Clinton,]" according to MRC analysts.

The disparity between the Trump and Harris coverage is even greater than in 2020, "when Joe Biden was treated to 66% positive coverage, vs. 92% negative for Trump," the study reads.

MRC reported that ABC, CBS and NBC have spent more than 200 minutes of airtime, most of it negative, harping on controversies surrounding Trump while glossing over or, in many cases, outright ignoring controversies related to Harris - such as plagiarism accusations and allegations surrounding her husband, Doug Emhoff.

"Instead, Harris’ coverage has been larded with enthusiastic quotes from pro-Harris voters, creating a positive ‘vibe’ for the Democrat even as network reporters criticize Trump themselves," MRC writes.

Analysts reviewed more than 600 segments about the presidential race that aired on ABC, CBS or NBC beginning on the day President Biden suspended his candidacy in late July, through October 25.

After weeks of glowing coverage for Harris as the Democratic nominee, the three networks seemingly changed their tone following the debate between Harris and Trump in September, the MRC analysts found.

"The networks shifted attention away from Harris, spending significantly more airtime targeting Trump," the report reads.

"From the date Harris entered the race on July 21 through September 10, she received 353 minutes of network evening news coverage, virtually identical to the 355 minutes given Trump during the same period. Since then, however, TV has focused nearly twice as much attention on Trump as Harris: 398 minutes for the former President, compared to just 230 minutes for the Vice President," the study found.

"The additional airtime for Trump was hardly meant as a gift. Instead, it reflected the networks’ intensive focus on Trump controversies, providing opportunities for negative news coverage," according to MRC.

Roughly 31% of the 753 minutes of evening news spent on Trump since July 21 spotlighted his personal controversies, the study found. "This compares to barely five percent of Harris’s airtime [28 minutes, out of a total 583 minutes of coverage] spent on similar topics.

The networks repeatedly cited January 6 and Trump’s claim that the 2020 election was rigged while labeling him as a "danger to democracy," MRC reported.

Comparatively, "Harris faced no such onslaught. Over fourteen weeks, evening news viewers heard a scant 5 minutes, 22 seconds of GOP criticisms that she’s too liberal, barely one-sixth the airtime spent on the claim Trump is a ‘fascist.’ None of this coverage included any criticisms of Harris from either network reporters or nonpartisan sources," MRC analysts found.


"Add it all up, and the media coverage of the past three months is more lopsided than that of any presidential election in the modern media age," the report reads.

"So if Donald Trump regains the White House next week, the media’s campaign against him will have accomplished nothing, except the further erosion of their own reputations."

The MRC findings come shortly after a Gallup study revealed that trust remains both historically and consistently low in the media. Only 31% of those polled expressed a "great deal" or "fair amount" of faith in the media to report news properly.

"For the third consecutive year, more U.S. adults have no trust at all in the media (36%) than trust it a great deal or fair amount. Another 33% of Americans express ‘not very much’ confidence," Gallup Senior Editor Megan Brenan wrote.

ABC, CBS and NBC News did not respond to Fox News Digital's request for comment.

He's an absolute shit show. He's racist. He is a misogynist. He's a serial woman abuser. He's mocked, handicapped people. He paid off a porn star. He's a convicted felon. FFS he had to edit content from a comedian so he didn't call Kamala the c-word.

I can't believe his coverage is negative. LOL The guy is a piece of shit. You're just too stupid to see it.
 
From media research center website.

Media Research Center
Since 1987, the Media Research Center has worked successfully to expose and counter the leftist bias of the national news media


I suspect their study design and biases may be influencing their results.

I don't know they seem legit lol
 
Well, he’s a convicted rapist, fraudster, a felon and declared bankruptcy 6x. All his national security advisors, secrataries of state, chiefs of staff, other republicans, family, people in his administration, etc say he’s a lying stupid terrible person that does not deserve the office. His former vice president won’t endorse him. Disparaged John McCain’s military service, called our military dead, losers and suckers. Lied when he said immigrants are eating dogs and cats. Was destroyed by Harris in their one debate and was too scared to debate her again. Loves our country’s adversaries (dictators) and steals classified documents and refused to return them.

I think the media has been too nice to him, considering.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EasyHawk
The media simply playing video from Trump's campaign appearances would be labeled as biased. It's newsworthy.
Lol that a FoxNews unit complains about bias in coverage.
Zero credibility.
The part that's bias is cuts/edits to change/remove context. I learned in 2016 the only way to know what was said at a Trump rally is to watch it, because once the talking heads start you can't believe anything.

More representative than all those rallies is the Joe Rogan interview, well and the fact that he was president for 4 years.
 

Coverage of Trump, Harris in presidential race 'most lopsided in history,' 85% negative for Trump: report​


Coverage on ABC, CBS and NBC News of the presidential race between former President Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris has been the most "lopsided in history," a new study released one week before the election found.

Analysis from the Media Research Center (MRC) published Monday found that Harris has received 78% positive coverage on broadcast evening news since July, versus Trump, who has been the subject of 85% negative coverage on the same networks

"The difference in coverage between the two candidates is far greater than in 2016, when both Trump and then-challenger Hillary Clinton received mostly negative coverage [91% negative for Trump, vs. 79% negative for Clinton,]" according to MRC analysts.

The disparity between the Trump and Harris coverage is even greater than in 2020, "when Joe Biden was treated to 66% positive coverage, vs. 92% negative for Trump," the study reads.

MRC reported that ABC, CBS and NBC have spent more than 200 minutes of airtime, most of it negative, harping on controversies surrounding Trump while glossing over or, in many cases, outright ignoring controversies related to Harris - such as plagiarism accusations and allegations surrounding her husband, Doug Emhoff.

"Instead, Harris’ coverage has been larded with enthusiastic quotes from pro-Harris voters, creating a positive ‘vibe’ for the Democrat even as network reporters criticize Trump themselves," MRC writes.

Analysts reviewed more than 600 segments about the presidential race that aired on ABC, CBS or NBC beginning on the day President Biden suspended his candidacy in late July, through October 25.

After weeks of glowing coverage for Harris as the Democratic nominee, the three networks seemingly changed their tone following the debate between Harris and Trump in September, the MRC analysts found.

"The networks shifted attention away from Harris, spending significantly more airtime targeting Trump," the report reads.

"From the date Harris entered the race on July 21 through September 10, she received 353 minutes of network evening news coverage, virtually identical to the 355 minutes given Trump during the same period. Since then, however, TV has focused nearly twice as much attention on Trump as Harris: 398 minutes for the former President, compared to just 230 minutes for the Vice President," the study found.

"The additional airtime for Trump was hardly meant as a gift. Instead, it reflected the networks’ intensive focus on Trump controversies, providing opportunities for negative news coverage," according to MRC.

Roughly 31% of the 753 minutes of evening news spent on Trump since July 21 spotlighted his personal controversies, the study found. "This compares to barely five percent of Harris’s airtime [28 minutes, out of a total 583 minutes of coverage] spent on similar topics.

The networks repeatedly cited January 6 and Trump’s claim that the 2020 election was rigged while labeling him as a "danger to democracy," MRC reported.

Comparatively, "Harris faced no such onslaught. Over fourteen weeks, evening news viewers heard a scant 5 minutes, 22 seconds of GOP criticisms that she’s too liberal, barely one-sixth the airtime spent on the claim Trump is a ‘fascist.’ None of this coverage included any criticisms of Harris from either network reporters or nonpartisan sources," MRC analysts found.


"Add it all up, and the media coverage of the past three months is more lopsided than that of any presidential election in the modern media age," the report reads.

"So if Donald Trump regains the White House next week, the media’s campaign against him will have accomplished nothing, except the further erosion of their own reputations."

The MRC findings come shortly after a Gallup study revealed that trust remains both historically and consistently low in the media. Only 31% of those polled expressed a "great deal" or "fair amount" of faith in the media to report news properly.

"For the third consecutive year, more U.S. adults have no trust at all in the media (36%) than trust it a great deal or fair amount. Another 33% of Americans express ‘not very much’ confidence," Gallup Senior Editor Megan Brenan wrote.

ABC, CBS and NBC News did not respond to Fox News Digital's request for comment.


There will be someone who chimes in here and says the 85% negative coverage for Trump is too low. Book it.

When the coverage is this lopsided, at what point does it amount to election interference?

We're already there,... Media bias is a bigger problem than any foreign influence that might be in play

Pro-tip: Don't run a serial liar, sexual assaulter, narcissist, racist, fraud POS and then come crying about the media covering him accurately. The dude is human scum and can't shuffle his fat moronic ass off this Earth fast enough.
 
The part that's bias is cuts/edits to change/remove context. I learned in 2016 the only way to know what was said at a Trump rally is to watch it, because once the talking heads start you can't believe anything.

More representative than all those rallies is the Joe Rogan interview, well and the fact that he was president for 4 years.

It's actually worse to watch it completely; but it takes patience.
 
I'm reality the media completely sanewashed Trump. He's insane yet they mostly portray him as normal. Press does DonOld a huge favor on a daily basis.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Menace Sockeyes
From media research center website.

Media Research Center
Since 1987, the Media Research Center has worked successfully to expose and counter the leftist bias of the national news media


I suspect their study design and biases may be influencing their results.

So, a concern specializing in, or concentrating "countering" left-wing reporting bias in national news media is to be relied on for objectivity?

MRC is a right-wing watchdog founded by William F. Buckley's nephew, funded by the Mercer Family and shares the ultraconservative credentials you would expect from this orbit, to ultimately include Pat Buchanan.

The purpose of the group you celebrate was to censor and gradually gain control of the radio, TV and written press. Looks like it's working.

You must be pleased.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Menace Sockeyes
So, a concern specializing in, or concentrating "countering" left-wing reporting bias in national news media is to be relied on for objectivity?

MRC is a right-wing watchdog founded by William F. Buckley's nephew, funded by the Mercer Family and shares the ultraconservative credentials you would expect from this orbit, to ultimately include Pat Buchanan.

The purpose of the group you celebrate was to censor and gradually gain control of the radio, TV and written press. Looks like it's working.

You must be pleased.
Huh? My point is that they are biased. Their study design almost certainly is intended to achieve the desired results. It's not real science.
 
What could any of them possibly say positive about Trump? Seriously. “Gee…his hair looked really nice while he was making fun of that handicapped guy.”
 
  • Like
Reactions: hawkeyetraveler
You can only put so much lipstick on a pig. Of course, his minions will cry “Foul!” Those of us who watch him cry “Traitor!”

Traitors need to be portrayed for what they are… and they are negatives. Sorry.

I wish Trump all the luck in the world the next 4 years… for my sake.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT