Study: Kerry has not capitalized on Bush's bad press

[Khephra]

Media coverage of President Bush has been largely unflattering this campaign season, but there's little indication the bad press has affected the country's view of him, according to a survey being released today.

The findings may be more ominous for the Democratic challenger, John Kerry, who -- at least until last week's selection of John Edwards as his running mate -- was largely missing from national campaign coverage and had left an "indistinct" impression on voters with one notable exception. The study found that the public says he is significantly more likely to "flip-flop" on the issues than Bush.

"Neither of these guys is in control of their message, but it's probably not hurting Bush as much," said Tom Rosenstiel, director of the Project for Excellence in Journalism. "Bush has suffered a huge onslaught of news coverage, but it's generally not having any impact on people's perceptions. Meanwhile, Kerry has not made much of an impression because he's been absent. . . . The news is probably, on balance, worse for Kerry."

The survey, produced by the Project for Excellence in Journalism in conjunction with the University of Missouri School of Journalism and the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press, evaluated how major "character themes" about the candidates were portrayed in the news media as well as in political ads and on late-night comedy shows this year from March to June. The news coverage that was examined included more than 1,500 stories or commentaries that appeared in six major newspapers, on 20 television and radio news and talk programs, and on five Internet blogs. The Pew Research Center measured public attitudes about the major campaign themes.

http://www.boston.com/news/politics/president/articles/2004/07/12/study_kerry_has_not_capitalized_on_bushs_bad_press/

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

1. It's media attention

Bush gets it - Kerry doesn't. Expect this to change as the elections draw closer and during the Convention, and also now that he's named a VP.

[Beetwasher]

2. This Reflects More on The PRESS NOT KERRY

Kerry has been commenting, but he doesn't get nearly the coverage he should, nor do the scandals surrounding Bush get the coverage they should...

[AlGore-08.com]

5. Anybody who couldn't see this coming up 5th Ave w/a marching band

Should be sent to bed without a cookie...

[Hegemony Cricket]

3. I wonder why the media isn't called to the mat...

...for concentrating on non-stories like Kerry and Edwards touching while ignoring completely (at least in broadcast news) the Bush destroyed Reserve records news that was buried on Friday.

How goddamn frustrating...

[tom_paine]

4. It's always funny how they measure the New Imperial Amerika

using "Old Republic" measurements.

In order for these conclusions to be valid, we would have to have a Free Press here in the Empire.

We don't.

Whatever the TRUE explanation, this sort of "Old Republic" analysis has as much meaning as trying to figure out the Nazis by looking at the Weimar Republic.

[trogdor]

6. It is hard to turn public opinion overnight.

The United States is a huge nation. Steering it is more like steering the U.S.S. Enterprise (the aircraft carrier) than steering a Mazda Miata. Thus, barring some catastrophic event like 9/11, making a dent in public opinion about Bush or anyone else takes time.

[JDPriestly]

7. Kerry is running a relatively positive campaign.

Being positive doesn't get headlines. Can you imagine a headline reading, "Kerry tells crowds, 'I will do what is best for America'"? That would be like having a headline: "Presidential candidate promises to do his duty." There is no story.

But, Kerry's positive campaign may pay off in the end. Apparently, research shows that independents and undecideds do not like negative campaigning. A candidate's base does. We who are in Kerry's base support him strongly. The bad news on Bush motivates us. There is no danger that, in the absence of negative campaigning by Kerry, we will decide to vote for Bush or not vote at all. So, Kerry is free to campaign positively and go after the independent voter. Kerry may not be getting much press coverage, but that may be a small price to pay for having a positive image in the end.

Bush has been campaigning negatively. Besides the fact that the Republicans always do, that suggests that he fears losing the support of his base. He has to get them to vote not for him, but against Kerry/Edwards. Bush's campaign style betrays his fear of not being able to hold onto his base supporters. He has to campaign negatively to keep their loyalty. That is because the only thing he gives most of them is fear, not hope or policies that will benefit them.

Since the press won't do it, it is up to us to get Kerry's message out to voters -- one on one. Also, as individuals, we are free to be negative about Bush as long as we are speaking for ourselves. When we are campaigning for Kerry, we need to respect the tone of his campaign and be positive.

[Claire Beth]

8. I agree! n/t

[bemildred]

9. "Project for Excellence in Journalism"

Gosh, I wonder where they came from and what they do?

This is pure 100% PR bullshit, the third party technique,
and all to sell the "The news is probably, on balance,
worse for Kerry" meme. An utter crock.

[jayfish]

10. Ya, Right... "Largely Unflattering".

Let's see. MSRNC had a Bush love-in all afternoon yesterday and didn't CNN run "Fly Boys" for the 80th time.

:eyes:

Jay

[MrTriumph]

11. "Excellence in Journalism"? Get real!

A well trained lap-dog press obediently parrots W. It is sad it took Iraq for the people to see what's been going on in their name.

[Democat]

12. Who wrote this stupid lying article? Bush has been ass kissed by the media

What a joke.

[ScreamingMeemie]

13. I don't think he really has to at this point. Bush is doing a good

job of running against himself right now. :hi: