Wiki page up on "Media bias against Bernie Sanders"

Homepage | Forums | Main Forums | General Discussion | Wiki page up on "Media bias against Bernie Sanders"

Viewing 0 reply threads
  • Author
    • #233235
      • Total Posts: 1,974

      It may get deleted.

      Various media outlets have raised concerns that the mainstream media in the United States have made a concerted effort to downplay, underreport, or ignore the popularity of Bernie Sanders, primarily concerning both his 2016 and 2020 presidential campaigns. Accusations have ranged from explicit media bias, journalistic malpractice, and distortions of information and data. Alternative media such as Rising with the Hill’s Krystal Ball and Saagar Enjeti (by The Hill), JacobinVoxCommon DreamsFairness and Accuracy in Reporting, prominent YouTube political commentators, among others have published articles, videos, and reports discussing what they see as an alleged media bias against Bernie Sanders. Online communities on websites such as Twitter and Reddit have played a role in documenting what they see as bias in reporting as well. The campaign runs its own media platforms such as the online newsletter Bern Notice, the Hear the Bern podcast, a channel on Twitch, as well as Twitter and Facebook—many of which discuss media bias and what they call the Bernie Blackout.

      Accusations of bias often revolve around themes concerning the concentration of media ownership, profit-driven special interests, manufacturing consent and the propaganda model, general media propagandaconflicts of interests, and agenda-setting theory. The most prominent media organizations being accused of bias have been MSNBC, the Washington Post, and the New York Times. Many of the media organizations have responded to the criticisms in various ways through rebuttals, criticism, and analysis. Various studies have been done in an effort to document statistical data in regard to news coverage of presidential candidates.

      First discussed during the 2016 Democratic Party presidential primaries, responses to the outcome gave rise to accusations of conspiracies about rigging of the primary election—most notably from the DNC leaked emails leading to investigations, public apologies, and resignations of DNC officials. Further discussions have arisen since Sanders’ announcement for his 2020 campaign echoing similar themes from 2016.


      Harvard Kennedy School report

      In June 2016, a report was released by the Harvard Kennedy School Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics, and Public Policy that documented systemic media bias of candidate campaign coverage for the 2016 presidential primaries.[19] The report found that,

      …during the year 2015, major news outlets covered Donald Trump in a way that was unusual given his low initial polling numbers—a high volume of media coverage preceded Trump’s rise in the polls. Trump’s coverage was positive in tone—he received far more “good press” than “bad press.” The volume and tone of the coverage helped propel Trump to the top of Republican polls.

      The Democratic race in 2015 received less than half the coverage of the Republican race. Bernie Sanders’ campaign was largely ignored in the early months but, as it began to get coverage, it was overwhelmingly positive in tone. Sanders’ coverage in 2015 was the most favorable of any of the top candidates, Republican or Democratic. For her part, Hillary Clinton had by far the most negative coverage of any candidate. In 11 of the 12 months, her “bad news” outpaced her “good news,” usually by a wide margin, contributing to the increase in her unfavorable poll ratings in 2015.

Viewing 0 reply threads
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.