Media Matters

2008 election

Media continue to uncritically report McCain campaign attacks on their coverage, but case studies still show disparate coverage in McCain's favor
Despite the media’s often uncritical reporting of the McCain campaign’s accusation that their coverage throughout the 2008 election cycle favored his opponent, a Media Matters review of coverage of two stories negatively affecting or reflecting on Sen. Barack Obama -- his ties to Ayers and Rezko -- and two stories negatively affecting or reflecting on Sen. John McCain -- his reported facilitation of land deals that benefited donors and his association with G. Gordon Liddy -- found disparate coverage in McCain’s favor. Read more

’08 SHOCK: Drudge still smearing, distorting quotes, and touting fake allegations
Media critics have recently postulated that while Matt Drudge may have once set the media's agenda, his influence has waned and his efforts to inject himself in the media's coverage of the presidential election have largely fallen flat. This election season, Drudge has posted a long series of items that were false on their face or turned out to be false, making the strong case that, if his influence is not in fact waning, it should be. Read more

Drudge unplugged: How his campaign influence has collapsed

More Drudge Coverage

In 2008, will media recall 2004 declarations of Bush “mandate”?
President Bush was re-elected in 2004 with 286 electoral votes, the smallest popular-vote margin since 1976 (excluding the 2000 election) and the lowest electoral vote count for an incumbent president’s re-election since 1916. Nevertheless, many in the media were quick to echo Vice President Dick Cheney’s assertion that “the nation” gave Bush “a mandate.” It remains to be seen whether the media will apply the same standard in assessing the results of the 2008 election. Read more

County Fair: The press rewrites Dem history

Column

Joe Biden and the press: A case study in the absurd
By Eric Boehlert

As the marathon campaign season winds down, it's worth noting how the treatment of Biden simply accentuated the Beltway press' glaring Achilles heel: its insatiable appetite for trivia and insistence on putting personality and style ahead of substance. For that, Biden became a case study in the absurd. Keep in mind that in comparison with the other candidates, Biden received very little coverage. Yet what little coverage Biden generated seemed at times to be devoted exclusively to the trivial pursuit of his so-called gaffes. In other words, the gaffe coverage didn't represent some of the Biden coverage. It was the Biden coverage. Read more