|
E-mail this page to a friend!
Senior Citizen Politics
Presidential Campaign Passes Iraq in News but Old
Men Lead in Dissatisfaction
People not upset with election candidates or issues,
just early start
 Aug.
20, 2007 - The 2008 Presidential campaign - with its crowded
field and accelerated timetable - emerged as the leading story in the
American news media in the second quarter of 2007, supplanting the
policy debate over Iraq. But, the public in particular older white men
have a negative view of the campaign, with just one-in-five with a
favorable thing to say about it.
To be sure, there's nothing new in public disdain
for political campaigns -- it's almost a national birthright, writes
Richard Morin in reporting on the latest national survey by the Pew
Research Center for the People & the Press.
 He notes, however, this campaign may not be doing
that badly in public opinion, when compared to previous election.
A relatively large minority of Americans -- at
least in comparison with public opinion at this stage of previous
presidential contests -- say they're interested and engaged by the 2008
campaign, he says.
It's also notable what many of this year's critics
are most upset about. Their biggest beef is with the early start of
Campaign 2008, rather than with the candidates themselves or the issues
or tone of the contest. The single most frequently volunteered
impression of the presidential race so far: Too early.
An analysis of the survey results shows:
● Americans at or near the top of the income and
education ladder are the most uncomplimentary about the presidential
campaign.
Nearly two-thirds (64%) of all college graduates describe the
campaign negatively, compared with 44% of those who have not attended
college. Among those with postgraduate degree, fully 70% have a negative
impression of the race.
● There is a modest gender gap on impressions
of the campaign: 55% of all men but just 48% of women have a negative
view, while women are slightly more likely than men (20% vs. 17%) to
feel favorably.
● Older men in particular are sour about the
race: 64% of all men 50 years old or older but 52% of women that age
offered negative evaluations. (Among those younger than 50, the gap
closed significantly: 49% of men and 46% of women are displeased with
the campaign.)
● There is a substantial generation gap in
impressions of the campaign. Nearly six-in-10 (57%) of those 50 and
older had a negative view of the campaign, compared with 48% of younger
adults.
● Blacks are considerably less critical of the
race than are whites -- and also significantly less likely to have
formed an impression. A majority (56%) of whites offered a negative
view, nearly double the proportion of blacks (31%) who had a similar
reaction.
● Midwesterners and suburbanites are more
negative about the campaign than are residents of other regions. Nearly
six-in-10 Midwesterners (57%) offer a negative view; in contrast, fewer
than half (46%) of East-coast residents are similarly sour. Suburbanites
are significantly more negative than city dwellers (57% vs. 45%) while
urbanites are more upbeat than rural residents (22% vs. 15%).
● There is a sharp partisan difference in the
early evaluations of this campaign. A larger proportion of Republicans
(61%) are negative about the campaign than Democrats (39%) or
independents (55%). Liberals, too, are less critical: Less than half
(45%) had thought negatively about the race, compared with 56% of
conservatives and 53% of moderates.
To be fair to Campaign 2008, the most frequent
criticism of the races had nothing to do with the worthiness of the
candidates or the quality of the debate, emphasizes Morin.
In addition to too early phrases such too long and
premature were frequently used by respondents to describe their
reactions, he says.
While hardly positive, these terms suggest
irritation and weariness rather than outright disgust or anger.
Moreover, a positive reaction Interesting -- was the second-most
frequently encountered impression of the campaign, an evaluation that
echoes other survey results suggesting a larger share of Americans are
paying attention to this presidential contest today than at a similar
point in other recent presidential races.
Still, disparaging evaluations are more common
than compliments: boring, a joke and bad were frequently volunteered.
And Americans who said they have been thinking hard about the
presidential candidates are more negative than those who have given the
hopefuls little or no consideration -- a result that suggests engagement
and familiarity may breed some measure of disapproval, at least so far
in this presidential campaign.
(For a full list of the words people used to
describe the campaign, see the Pew Research Center for the People & the
Press' survey report: "A
Summer of Discontent with Washington")
Shift in News Coverage From Iraq
The Project for Excellence in Journalism's News
Coverage Index, a weekly content analysis of a broad cross-section of
American news media, captured the news medias shift from Iraq to the
campaign..
In the period from April through June of 2007,
press coverage of the war in Iraq declined markedly. Together the three
major storylines of the war -- the policy debate, events on the ground,
and the impact on the U.S. homefront -- filled 15% of the total newshole
in the quarter, a drop of roughly a third from the first three months of
the year, when it filled 22%.
That decrease resulted largely from a decline in
coverage of the Washington-based policy debate, which fell 42% from the
first to second quarter, once the Democrats failed to impose timetables
in legislation funding of the war.
The project's
weekly NCI examines the news agenda of 48 different outlets from
five sectors of the media and allows a snapshot of the media agenda --
what topics the media are choosing to highlight and which they are not.
The quarterly report considers 13 weeks of data
together, more than 18,000 stories, allowing for deeper analysis across
time, including comparisons of different news organizations and in the
case of television, even different programs on the same network.
Among the findings in the second quarterly report
of the PEJ's News Coverage Index:
● After Democrats received more than twice the
coverage of Republicans in the first quarter of the year (61% to 24%),
coverage evened out in the second quarter. Democrats received 42% of the
coverage versus 41% for Republicans. That Republican gain came largely
from a one month surge in May.
● Attention to the Iraq war fell across all five
media sectors in the second quarter. The bulk of the decline occurred
after May 24, when Congress approved funding without including troop
withdrawal timetables, a move widely viewed as a White House victory. In
all, the policy debate filled 7% of the space or airtime in the quarter,
down from 12% in the three months of the year.
● There continue to be clear differences in the
news judgments of different cable channels. As in the first quarter, the
Fox News Channel devoted roughly half as much coverage to the war (8%)
than its rivals, CNN (18%) and MSNBC (15%). On the subject of the
presidential campaign, MSNBC stood out, providing more than twice the
percent of airtime of either competitor.
● When it came to party breakdown of the campaign
coverage, the cable distinctions were found not across networks but
across programs. On CNN, for instance, Paula Zahn focused more on
Democrats, while Anderson Cooper spent more time on Republicans. On the
Fox News Channel, Bill O'Reilly and Shepard Smith focused most on
Democrats, while Hannity & Colmes and Brit Hume were more evenly divided
between the two parties.
● The Virginia Tech campus massacre that claimed
33 lives was the biggest story for any given week so far this year. It
accounted for 51% of all coverage April 15-20. But the media's attention
to the story was fleeting: by the end of April, coverage had virtually
disappeared. The policy debate in Iraq was the second most covered event
of the year so far the week the president announced the "surge." Don
Imus' firing was the third most heavily covered story of the year in any
given week.
● If media attention translates into political
pressure, the argument that talk radio helped kill the immigration bill
in Congress has some support in the data. Thanks to energetic opposition
from Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and Michael Savage, immigration was
the biggest topic, at 16%, on conservative talk radio in the second
quarter. (Liberal radio hosts were much quieter.) In the media overall
immigration was the fourth-biggest story of the quarter, tripling its
level from the first three months of the year.
● Paris Hilton is no Anna Nicole Smith. Or
perhaps a short stay in the slammer is no match for a mysterious death
that leaves behind their heir to a fortune with uncertain parentage. In
any case, the socialite's jailhouse drama in the end attracted much less
media attention than the playmate-turned-reality TV star's death.
Smith's demise was a long-running saga that came in the eighth-biggest
story of the first quarter. Hilton's June jailing proved to be a mostly
one-week story that failed to make the top-10 story list this quarter.
>>
Read the complete report
Click to More Senior News on the
Front Page
Copyright: SeniorJournal.com |
