MRC/NB's Bozell on 'Hannity & Colmes' to Discuss Bias in Favor of Dem Candidates


Brent Bozell, President of the Media Research Center which runs NewsBusters, appeared Thursday night (August 30) on FNC's Hannity & Colmes to discuss the MRC's study, “Rise and Shine on Democrats: How the ABC, CBS and NBC Morning Shows Are Promoting Democrats on the Road to the White House” (Executive Summary). It found that, from January through July, the ABC, CBS and NBC morning shows devoted nearly twice the time to stories about, and interviews with, Democratic over Republican presidential candidates, avoided placing liberal labels on Democrats and also pushed candidates of both parties from the left: “Of the substantive questions that could be categorized as reflecting a political agenda, more than two-thirds (69%) of the questions to Democrats reflected a liberal premise, and more than four-fifths (82%) of the questions to Republicans came from the same perspective.”

Alan Colmes naturally nitpicked the study, but Sean Hannity praised it as “exhaustive.”

Video clip (5:33): Real (4.2 MB) or Windows Media (3.5 MB), plus MP3 audio (1.9 MB)

Story Continues Below Ad ↓

The study, released Wednesday, was coordinated and written by MRC Research Director Rich Noyes, with research assistance from MRC news analysts/NewsBusters bloggers Geoffrey Dickens, Scott Whitlock and Justin McCarthy.

Bozell's column on the study.

The PDF, which matches the hard copy, of the entire 18-page Special Report.

The HTML version of the full Special Report study, with a couple of video clips.

The text of the Executive Summary for the August 29 Special Report study:

Rise and Shine on Democrats
How the ABC, CBS and NBC Morning Shows Are Promoting Democrats On the Road to the White House

As the 2008 presidential campaign season gets underway, wide-open primary races in both the Republican and Democratic parties are competing for the media's attention. So are the broadcast networks covering both sides equally, or are they tilting the campaign playing field in favor of liberal Democratic candidates?

To find out, Media Research Center analysts reviewed all 517 campaign segments on ABC's Good Morning America, CBS's The Early Show and NBC's Today from January 1 through July 31. Those three broadcast morning shows draw nine times the audience of their cable news competitors, and are geared toward everyday voters, not political junkies. These programs are therefore a prime battleground in each campaign's quest for positive media attention.

The results are astonishing: Not only are the network morning shows overwhelmingly focused on Democrats, they are actively promoting the Democrats' liberal agenda.

Among the major findings:

# The networks offered nearly twice as much coverage of the Democrats. More than half of all campaign segments (284, or 55%) focused on the Democratic contest, compared with just 152 (29%) devoted to the Republicans. The remaining stories either offered roughly equal discussion of both parties or did not focus on the major parties.

# All three Democratic frontrunners received more attention than any of the top Republican candidates, with New York Senator Hillary Clinton receiving the most coverage of all.

# Undeclared liberal candidates such as former Vice President Al Gore and New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg received more network TV attention than many of the declared Republican candidates.

# The network morning shows doled out nearly three times as much airtime (4 hours, 35 minutes) to interviews with the various Democratic campaigns. In contrast, the Republicans received just 1 hour and 44 minutes of interview airtime.

# In their interviews with the candidates, the network hosts emphasized a liberal agenda. Of the substantive questions that could be categorized as reflecting a political agenda, more than two-thirds (69%) of the questions to Democrats reflected a liberal premise, and more than four-fifths (82%) of the questions to Republicans came from the same perspective.

# The top Democratic candidates received much more favorable coverage than their GOP counterparts, with Senator Clinton cast as "unbeatable" and Illinois Senator Barack Obama tagged as a "rock star." The most prominent Republican, Arizona Senator John McCain, was portrayed as a loser because of his support for staying the course in Iraq.

# Not once did network reporters describe Senator Clinton and former North Carolina Senator John Edwards as "liberal," while ABC only once labeled Obama as "liberal." Yet the networks showed no hesitation in attaching the "liberal" label to Republican frontrunner Rudy Giuliani, who was so branded 12 times.

These early returns suggest that ABC, CBS and NBC are skewing their news in ways that will benefit the Democratic candidates in 2008. The broadcast networks have a responsibility to cover both parties in a fair and even-handed manner -- not for the sake of the candidates, but for the voters. That means giving viewers a chance to hear from all of the major candidates in interviews, asking them similar questions, and balancing the day-to-day news coverage to keep both Democratic and Republican primary voters equally well-informed.


Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

* Sweet

Excellent work Brent!

I think you are really making a difference, even if the Great Oz keeps trying to close the curtain!

"I'm interested in the fact that the less secure a man is, the more likely he is to have extreme prejudice." Clint Eastwood

What's new?

The time granted to libs has always far exceeded that of the conservatives, no surprise.

The gist of these findings is agenda, retreat and socialism.

JDW

CFR: Chung, Riady, Hsia, Trie, Huang, Hsu, Paw... Who's looking?

 

Coverage

Of course they will give the Dims more coverage. It is music to their ears to hear that Bush lied, his tax cuts are only for the rich. The war on terror is a bumper sticker, this is the worst president ever, the war in Iraq is lost. Bush, Rove and Gonzales should be impeached. Rove is Bushs' brain. The Republicans stole the 2000 election...........

I heard this

I heard this tonight....

Excellent...Excellent....Excellent...

Now if we could just do something with that obnoxious, intentionally interrupting, 'Bias...What Bias' Colmes.

It sounded like he had some

It sounded like he had some good questions about some of the things included in the study, such as Bloomberg, who's not a democrat. 

boa... Bloomberg isn't

boa...

Bloomberg isn't anything politically...

Switch hitter...when convenient. 

So they shouldn't have

So they shouldn't have mentioned him, right?

And the point about conservative candidates not coming on shows. You can't say "Hey you don't have enough Republicans on" when they won't come on. 

boa... My point is I

boa...

My point is I could care less whether they mention Bloomie...

I pray he runs with say a Hagel or McCain.

Repub's will win the Presidency in '08 for sure...

LMAO! 

Gotcha. I was kinda looking

Gotcha. I was kinda looking forward to State of the Union addresses being referred to as The Bloomberg Report. 

Ouch

That is terrible lol

Yeah...I apologize. ;-)

Yeah...I apologize. ;-)

boa...Little Bro... You

boa...Little Bro...

You have me ROFLMAO friend!

Too danged funny.

Balboa

Wasn't one point that Bloomberg, who's not declared and running for president, has received more MSM coverage that the declared Republican presidential candidate (except for McCain)? 

The other salient point was that Bloomberg, Al Gore and the Democrat presidential candidates (I'm assuming Clinton, Edwards and Obama) have all received more positive MSM coverage than the Republican candidates as well.

Bloomberg's political affiliation is inconsequential both to him (whatever gets him elected) and to the topic at hand.  Colmes was trying to detour the message and the messenger.  He is not that slick - I'd like to play poker with him because he has plenty of tells.

Killing them with kindness isn't working.  Time to get scrappy with the Donkeys.

Oh please, balboa

Oh please, balboa.

Has anyone ever seen balboa and Allen Colmes in the same place at the same time?

balboa, have you ever heard a criticism of a conservative that you didn't like? 

nine times the audience ...But WHOM is the audience ?

Who are these people ?  The ones with Time to watch the morning propaganda shows  ?  I doubt if they are gainfully employed.....maybe some night shift people....mostly housewives I would guess.

They need a Survey of just whom the MSM is Reaching...Who is the Audience  ?   My TV stays on in the Kitchen, when no one is watching it except the dog or Cat.   The Cat is a Liberal, maybe this is why ?  

They ain't that entertaining...those morning shows....I would suspect the ratings, how they are obtained, who is called/polled...after all, it's all about Advertising Rates, based upon Audience....

What good is a Free Press, if it is a False Press ?   David Foote  GoE

More Bozell on other networks please

I made a point to catch this appearance (thank you MRC cyberalerts) by Mr. Bozell.

It was everything I hoped for and more.  Brent as usual was on top of his game.  Bozell was superb in dealing with Colmes anticipated objections to the point of pointing out Colmes was making Brent's points for him. Brent also dealt with the networks stated concerns with the study in a very respectful, deliberate and convincing way.  Two thumbs way up!

More Brent Bozell on other networks please - He is very comfortable providing MRC's indisputable data, even in a very uncomfortable environment.

Missing the point on Bloomberg analogy

Apologies for a follow-up comment but having read down the thread after posting my previous comment I felt the need to shed some light on the "Bloomberg" issue to those who may have missed the show or were just not paying attention.  In addition this "Bloomberg" issue demonstrates perfectly my above point; "Colmes was making Brent's points for him".

Brent raised the issue of the significant time non-contenders such as potential candidates, candidates wives (on/off husband?), etc. had received compared to the relatively little time Republicans actively seeking the nomination had received.

Colmes rejected Brent's premise stating Bloomberg was a Republican.  Brent retorted that Colmes was making his point for him.  Here is someone (Bloomberg) that hasn't even thrown his hat in the ring, yet enjoying considerable air-time as opposed to that of Republicans currently engaged in campaigning.

The fact that those actively seeking the GOP nomination are given dramatically less air-time than others not currently running is the point Brent made - not party affiliation.

This is not to say that the inconsistency between the amount of air-time given Democrat nominees versus Republican nominees is breathtaking.  But that is not the point Brent was trying to make with the Bloomberg/others analogy.