BMI’s Seymour: Networks Coverage of Unemployment ‘13 Times More Negative to President Reagan than to Obama’

By NB Staff (Bio | Archive)
October 1, 2009 - 14:30 ET
  • Bookmark and Share

BMI's Julia A. Seymour appeared on today's Fox Business Live with Stuart Varney to discuss the discrepancy in media coverage of unemployment under Presidents Reagan and Obama.

Author of BMI's latest study, "Networks Flip-Flop on Jobs," Seymour explained her findings:

We looked specifically at seven months of coverage in 1982 and again in 2009 that had very similar periods of unemployment where it was going up between 8 - between 8 and the high 9 percent range. And what we found was that the network reporting on ABC, NBC and CBS was overwhelmingly negative to Reagan but positive toward Obama. They were actually 13 times more negative to President Reagan than they were to Obama.

As Seymour further explained, the bias continued over into outright cheerleading by the networks for Obama's policies.

They had different policy approaches and I would have to say that given the media coverage we've already seen under President Obama, that the media like Obama's approach and solutions to the economic problems we've had. Thy supported the stimulus package. We saw that again in this analysis of unemployment stories where the media were overwhelmingly pro-stimulus and pro-government intervention.


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.

From the "You don't say!!" files

October 1, 2009 - 15:19 ET by motherbelt

 They were actually 13 times more negative to President Reagan than they were to Obama.

.....and is anyone just flabbergasted by this revelation?

 

Ummmm, no

October 1, 2009 - 15:24 ET by legacyrepublican

Ummm, no, I don't have a sense of shock at all come to think of it.

Here, I am going to call my wife ... "Hey Honey, am I stoic, logical, and Vulcan?' ..... noise from the other end of the phone ... "My wife says nope."

Hope that helps your survey!

mmm, mmmm, mm

October 1, 2009 - 18:53 ET by 10ksnooker

uhhh no.

Reagan we often forget was beat on mercilessly by the media for everything.

For America to be free, the media must die.

Typical

October 1, 2009 - 15:58 ET by Brad90956

Not surprised at all.  Typical media bias.

unfair comparison

October 1, 2009 - 16:34 ET by Watches

Perhaps the coverage of Reagan was worse because his performance was worse.  He had longer to fix a smaller problem.  Obama inherited the worst economic crash since the Great Depression, and took visible action. Why would you expect Obama's coverage to be as negative?

 

Yeah, that is right /scar on

October 1, 2009 - 16:55 ET by legacyrepublican

Yeah, that is right, unfair comparison. Reagan didn't have a mess left to him by Jimmy Carter. You know, high interest rates, a misery index, unemployment. /sarc off

LR, don't forget... gas

October 1, 2009 - 17:09 ET by Jerry

LR, don't forget... gas lines, 70% tax brackets, hostage crisis, inflation, & global COOLing.

When asked if he went to war with Iraq  to derail the impeachment vote:  “I don’t think any serious person would believe that any President would do such a thing." - President Clinton (Dec 1998).

Boycott Olympics....

October 1, 2009 - 17:43 ET by upcountrywater

 
That would be a hoot, eww maybe not! 0bama still in office in '16....

State controlled health care is Tort Reform.

"Obama inherited the worst

October 1, 2009 - 21:39 ET by ckc1227

"Obama inherited the worst economic crash since the Great Depression, and took visible action."

And the unicorns. Don't forget about the unicorns.

Ignoramus. You seem to

October 1, 2009 - 21:49 ET by NL207

Ignoramus.

You seem to know NOTHING about the recession of 80-82.

We saw as a result of Carter's bumbling economic policies Inflation > 10% and Unemployment > 10%.  I remember mortgage interest rates in the 17 - 20%  range.

What we had coming into the Obama administration was nothing like that time.  But have no fear, the economic illiterate, Obama, has made all the right moves.  He has set the stage to cause even more trouble than Carter did.  He has spent more money.  He has printed more money.  He has nationalized industries.  he has overturned the rule of law.  He has appointed an overt bigot to SCOTUS.  He and his cohorts in Congress are about to destroy healthcare as we know it. 

You have plenty to be proud of.

timing

October 2, 2009 - 13:04 ET by Watches

Obama "owns" the unemployment rate now, but Reagan didn't "own" his, despite having been in office twice as long?  If you're going to change minds, you gotta address that point...

 

Stimulus plan

October 2, 2009 - 15:25 ET by Jerry Mack

Yo Watches! Obama said " My stimulus bill will create 2,000,000 jobs and prevent the unemployment rate from going above 8%".

 Later he said that the mess that they had inherited was worse than they thought. This only proves that he is inept, a very slow learner or a liar. You choose!

Not a huge Reagan fan here

October 1, 2009 - 20:51 ET by RR GOP

Not a huge Reagan fan here for several reasons, but he was still one of our best presidents in my book.  We certainly wouldn't be seeing what we are now under him if he were president.

Of course, the Libtards like to blame him for the S&L problems back then and Wall Street shenanigans...I simply can't.  I don't believe a president can single-handedly fix an economy, but can certainly use the veto pen to steer it in a positive direction and even more certainly has the power to hurt the economy (as we're seeing now).

One of the 34% who thinks George W. Bush was a great President. One of the 86% who wants to bring back the stock and pillory.