Harvard Study Reveals Huge Extent Of Anti-Trump Media Bias

Professors reinvent the wheel could be the headline on this story.

A study shows what everybody already knows–press coverage of President Donald Trump has been overwhelmingly negative, with the exception of coverage of his cruise missile attack on Syria.

Which goes to show that if the Israeli dog wags the American tail, the press will jump for joy in showing its approval.

Excerpt from Zerohedge

A major new study out of Harvard University has revealed the true extent of the mainstream media’s bias against Donald Trump.

Academics at the Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics and Public Policy analyzed coverage from Trump’s first 100 days in office across 10 major TV and print outlets.

They found that the tone of some outlets was negative in as many as 98% of reports [5], significantly more hostile than the first 100 days of the three previous administrations:

The academics based their study on seven US outlets and three European ones.

In America they analyzed CNN, NBC, CBS, Fox News, the New York Times, the Washington Post and the Wall Street Journal.

They also took into account the BBC, the UK’s Financial Times and the German public broadcaster ARD.

Every outlet was negative more often than positive.

Only Fox News, which features some of Trump’s most enthusiastic supporters and is often given special access to the President, even came close to positivity.

Fox was ranked 52% negative and 48% positive. – “Fair and Balanced” indeed.

The study also divided news items across topics. On immigration, healthcare, and Russia, more than 85% of reports were negative.

On the economy, the proportion was more balanced – 54% negative to 46% positive:

The study highlighted one exception: Trump got overwhelmingly positive coverage for launching a cruise missile attack on Syria.

Around 80% of all reports were positive about that.

The picture was very different for other recent administrations. The study found that President Obama’s first 100 days got a good write-up overall – with 59% of reports positive.

I remember the press coverage of Obama as nearly 100 percent positive, much higher than this study purports to find.

22 thoughts on “Harvard Study Reveals Huge Extent Of Anti-Trump Media Bias

  1. “overwhelmingly negative, with the exception of coverage of his cruise missile attack on Syria.’.
    So much for Jew opinion – which the (((media))) calls “public opinion”.

    The alt right was exactly the opposite – betrayed and angry about the cruise missiles on Syria but happy about most of Trumps other activities. Same with (((Jarhead Kushner))) – the alt right hates him and the (((media))) loves him.

    Know ye that when a Jew speaks ye heareth a lie.

  2. That is pretty bad, but they didn’t need to do a “study,” did they?! They could have asked any of us who keep up with Trump News almost every day. 😉

    Here’s some good news that might help to turn the tide…

    SPICER & PRIEBUS ARE OUT!!

    FYI: Interesting comments from a guy, Adam Gingrich (of PA), who knows what’s going on in the White House.

    He’s a regular on Bill Mitchell’s Your Voice America (which I do not regularly listen to but did the other night).
    –Adam is the guy in the brown jacket & with a full beard.
    –Adam’s Twitter ID: Wick Media Nation @DixieCupNation : *”The latest and most accurate news analysis and opinion available in new media. 20 years of political operations and communications experience.”*
    –He worked on the Trump Campaign; has a Linked-In bio; & another Twitter that is older where it appears he is mostly fighting trolls & Trump-haters. The newer one above is more “professional” re the Trump Admin.

    Below is a rough transcript of the STAFF CHANGES segment. (The rest I only noted the times when Gingrich comments, but did not attempt to transcribe all that.)

    YourVoice America (5/18-Thursday, 7pm EDT) “Impeachment Talk Slows”:

    Re: WHITE HOUSE STAFF CHANGES COMING !!!

    36:30 – Mitchell asks about possible staff changes at the WhiteHouse within the next six months.

    37:05 – 39:03 – Gingrich > Not six months but SIX DAYS!, 6-8-9 days. Trump wants to get the FBI Director position settled first before his trip; & it has NEVER BEEN A QUESTION whether he wanted to change staff by Memorial Day.

    SPICER & PRIEBUS ARE OUT & they KNOW they are OUT! Trump already has people in the process of getting security clearances in order to replace them, we don’t know who they are but it will take a couple of weeks. We KNOW these changes ARE COMING. It’s just a matter of HOW MANY are leaving & how many people are staying.

    And it is absolutely NECESSARY because the rumor mill, the intrigue, the leaks in there ARE ABSOLUTELY DESTRUCTIVE; it’s been an AWFUL SITUATION for the President, he is AT WITS END with it. He’s going on his first trip & a lot of reflection will come during that. It’s odd how you start to think differently once you’re away from the WhiteHouse for even a week. So when he gets back I think he’s going to hit the ground ready to go. He’s just like a lot of us, HE’S RUN OUT OF PATIENCE, the patience is GONE.

    I’m not knocking any of these people, but it’s been 120 days that feels like 1200 days. It’s just been like a tsunami, too much, too fast, it all got clogged up, like a drain, & somebody’s got to unplug it to get things moving in there.

    We’re NOT BRINGING IN BIG EGOs; Chris Christie is NOT coming in as Chief of Staff, Newt Gingrich is NOT coming in as Chief of Staff. The LAST thing he’s going to do is bring in more people who he has to worry about getting THEIR messages out to the press BEHIND HIS BACK [Me: Like KellyAnne?!! She needs to go as well.] So, look for a really mechanically-sound group of people to be the next guys in the WhiteHouse.

    39:03 – Mitchell: Many people have asked why didn’t he just get rid of all the lousy people at the start? Mitchell compares doing just that to what Jimmy Carter did & his admin was a disaster. So, per Mitchell, Trump “went to look at the building first” (the Presidency) “to see whether it only needed renovating, or did it need to be torn down & rebuilt from scratch.” [In other words, Trump had to test the waters. So it looks like the “building” needs to be torn down & built from scratch after all.]

    41:00 – 43:36 – The other guy, Kerry Smyth, comments on that topic.

    43:37 – Mitchell: So much of the leaks have been inaccurate, negative, the media, etc.

    Re: TRUMP’s MIDDLE EAST TRIP coming up:

    45:28 – Mitchell asks Gingrich re Trump’s Middle East trip.

    45:38 – 48:19 – Gingrich replies. Netanyahu pushing hard to get embassy moved to Jerusalem; etc. etc.

    51:32 – 54:37 – Gingrich again. Etc. Etc., & then re Putin [a rather negative viewpoint, that Putin is extremely manipulative & dangerous, blah blah.]

    End of Gingrich comments during the show.

    Rewind to hear earlier parts of the show where Adam Gingrich comments on various subjects:

    6:40 – Gingrich.

    15:30 – Gingrich.

    Re: LIEBERMAN as FBI DIRECTOR & WHY, from Trump’s point of view (also interesting):

    24:00-26:00 – About 2 minutes: Lieberman a 75-90% surety to be chosen as FBI Director.

    (Then Mitchell talks for the next 2 minutes, 26:00-28:00.)

    28:00-29:00 – Gingrich again, more about Lieberman for almost another minute.

    29:30 – Gingrich for another 1:40 minutes re Lieberman.

    31:30 – Gingrich for another minute re Lieberman.

    34:40 – Gingrich for another 2 minutes re Lieberman & Trump.

  3. Back to the Media, journalists have low executive function. They rate well on what we used to call “comprehension” (they call it “value tagging”):

    5/19/17: “Journalists drink too much, are bad at managing emotions, and operate at a lower level than average, according to a new study”:
    http://www.businessinsider.com/journalists-brains-function-at-a-lower-level-than-average-2017-5

    “…below-average ability to regulate their emotions, suppress biases, solve complex problems, switch between tasks, and show creative and flexible thinking.”

    No wonder writing/reporting has gone to the dogs. ;-/

  4. Must be a rogue researcher. Hard to believe that (((Harvard))) would commission such research or allow the truth to get out. (((They))) will probably retract it.

Leave a Reply. Comments Policy Forbids Insulting Other Commenters.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s