General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Bernie! Bernie, bernie bernie bernie bernie bernie. Bernie: Bernie bernie [View all]KPN
(17,542 posts)that means the media had a favorable bias toward Bernie. Bernie got slighted coverage-wise -- positive and negative. He definitely got nowhere near the coverage Hillary got ... but Hillary definitely got hammered, I'll give you all that.
At any rate, I think the anti-Bernie camp here is overstating his "positive" media coverage and pretty much ignoring the relative lack of coverage he experienced especially early on. As far as negatives re: Bernie, yeah, the media went lighter on him -- but he also didn't have a lot of baggage to go after anyway -- other than he's a "socialist".
My point in my response was really that our biases play a big role in how we view media coverage. To me, Chris Hayes was hyper-critical of Bernie -- but I know I was biased toward Bernie at the time. And regarding the "Bernie got tons of coverage", I had the exact opposite impression. My sense was that he was slighted by the media. It was always about Hillary and the GOP, and then about Hillary and Trump. That's the way I saw and felt about it. The studies/analyses I've seen support that.
BTW, I did google this as you suggested ... and if you want I'd be happy to share the stuff that I found.
Again, there's no question Hillary got hammered by the media generally and at a greater frequency by the media though.