By Nearly 8-to-1, Voters Say Journalists Want Obama to Win

Photo of Brent Baker.
  • Bookmark and Share

“Voters overwhelmingly believe that the media wants Barack Obama to win the presidential election,” a Pew Research Center for the People and the Press survey released Wednesday discovered. Specifically: “By a margin of 70%-9%, Americans say most journalists want to see Obama, not John McCain, win on Nov. 4. Another 8% say journalists don't favor either candidate, and 13% say they don't know which candidate most reporters support.”

The question (PDF of questionnaire): “Who do you think most newspaper reporters and TV journalists want to see win the presidential election -- Barack Obama or John McCain?” Unsurprisingly, 90 percent of Republicans recognized how journalists hope Obama is victorious, yet so did 62 percent of Democrats and independents.

Pew noted how “in recent presidential campaigns, voters repeatedly have said they thought journalists favored the Democratic candidate over the Republican,” but “this year's margin is particularly wide.” By comparison:

At this stage of the 2004 campaign, 50% of voters said most journalists wanted to see John Kerry win the election, while 22% said most journalists favored George Bush. In October 2000, 47% of voters said journalists wanted to see Al Gore win and 23% said most journalists wanted Bush to win. In 1996, 59% said journalists were pulling for Bill Clinton.

This year, by party affiliation:

In the current campaign, Republicans, Democrats and independents all feel that the media wants to see Obama win the election. Republicans are almost unanimous in their opinion: 90% of GOP voters say most journalists are pulling for Obama. More than six-in-ten Democratic and independent voters (62% each) say the same.

The survey of about 900 registered voters was conducted October 17-20.

A Pew Research Center for People and the Press survey released in June found those polled saw a pro-Obama tilt to coverage. My June 6 NewsBusters item, “Many Recognize Media's Pro-Obama Bias, Democrats Prefer CNN,” recounted:

“Far more Americans believe that the press coverage has favored Barack Obama than think it has favored Hillary Clinton,” a just-released survey, from the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press, discovered in determining 37 percent recognize a bias in favor of Obama. Even 35 percent of Democrats “see a pro-Obama bias” compared to 45 percent of Republicans and 40 percnt of independents.

The poll, of about 1,000 Americans taken in late May, found about the same percentage of Republicans and Democrats rely on MSNBC for campaign news, but: “Far more Republicans (24%) than Democrats (10%) get most of their campaign news from Fox [News Channel], while the opposite is true for CNN: 24% of Democrats look to CNN compared with just 13% of Republicans.”

For many more polls on how the public sees the news media, check the “How the Public Views the Media” section of the MRC's Media Bias Basics.

—Brent Baker is Vice President for Research and Publications at the Media Research Center


Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

This is one poll the

This is one poll the poll-loving MSM won't report. They're too busy working on getting Obama elected... 

McNotObama '08

An Observation...

Those who think the media do not have a dog in this fight, like some of those polled, are either completely ignorant or intellectually dishonest.

PERIOD. 

 

MSM = PR firm for the Democrat Party

What "journalists"?  Who

What "journalists"?  Who are these "journalists"?

I see nothing but Democrat cheerleaders.

mattm... You summed it

mattm...

You summed it up perfectly...

'nuff said...

"America isn't the problem...America is the solution." ~ Rush Limbaugh

Unfortunately

Sarah Palin's wardrobe cost is more important to the NYT than this information or doing a serious investigative report into the tangled web of the relationships of the Obama enablers and promoters.

Read the Orson Scott Card article published yesterday

I've never seen a better analysis than that written by Orson Scott Card yesterday. All I can say is read it. 

 

http://www.linearpub...

 

 

Good read - on target.

Good read - on target. I already enjoy Card's non-sci-fi books. When I picked up one of his books for the first time, it shocked the hell out of me that a fairly promonent Hollywood writer was a conservative.

McNotObama '08

Just a snippet from the

Just a snippet from the link:

;

Your job, as journalists, is to tell the truth. That's what you claim you do, when you accept people's money to buy or subscribe to your paper.

But right now, you are consenting to or actively promoting a big fat lie -- that the housing crisis should somehow be blamed on Bush, McCain and the Republicans. You have trained the American people to blame everything bad -- even bad weather -- on Bush, and they are responding as you have taught them to.

If you had any personal honor, each reporter and editor would be insisting on telling the truth -- even if it hurts the election chances of your favorite candidate.

Because that's what honorable people do. Honest people tell the truth even when they don't like the probable consequences. That's what honesty means. That's how trust is earned.

Barack Obama is just another politician, and not a very wise one. He has revealed his ignorance and naivete time after time -- and you have swept it under the rug, treated it as nothing.

Meanwhile, you have participated in the borking of Sarah Palin, reporting savage attacks on her for the pregnancy of her unmarried daughter -- while you ignored the story of John Edwards' own adultery for many months.

So I ask you now: Do you have any standards at all? Do you even know what honesty means?

Is getting people to vote for Barack Obama so important that you will throw away everything that journalism is supposed to stand for?

You might want to remember the way the National Organization of Women (NOW) threw away their integrity by supporting Bill Clinton despite his well-known pattern of sexual exploitation of powerless women. Who listens to NOW anymore? We know they stand for nothing; they have no principles.

Niner

Great link. Thanks!

"Your just the public relations machine of the Democrat Party, and it's time you were all fired and real journalists brought in"

soooo true!!

 

Barack Obama is not Barack Obama

Has anyone seen this article?

 

http://www.contraria...

what really worries me is...

since 70% say the media is in the tank for obama.... and that leaves 30% who either don't think that or don't know.....that means 30% of the people in this poll are stupid.  that's alot of stupid people.  because the media being in the tank for obama is not even a debatable point.

 

 Ecclesiastes 10:2 The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left.

Murtha's Hold on House seat slips

Journalists could start the prove the American people wrong about their bias by covering the fact that Congressman "ABSCAM" Murtha may lose his reelection bid which may tip Pennsylvania to a win for McCain.  We are waiting...

 

Murtha's hold on House seat slips

By Mike Wereschagin and David M. Brown
TRIBUNE-REVIEW
Thursday, October 23, 2008

Two veteran warriors battling to represent the 12th Congressional District appear locked in the closest race in the district in years.

Democratic Rep. John Murtha leads retired Army Lt. Col. William Russell by a little more than 4 percentage points, within the Susquehanna Poll's 4.9-point margin of error. The poll of 400 likely voters was conducted for the Tribune-Review on Tuesday, amid uproar over Murtha's statement that some of his constituents are racist.

It's not just about having a preference.

It's possible for someone to have a preference for a candidate and still report the news properly.  It appears, however, the media has completely abandoned their responsibilities, as a free press, this election.  There is little difference between this press coverage and that which one would see in a communist country in the 1960's.  I can't believe, out of all the news outlets, that everyone is willing to sacrifice their integrity the way this group has.  It must have something to do with their age and the schools they went to.  The one guy most of us thought conducted tough, but fair interviews, was Tim Russert and he wasn't schooled as a journalist.  Perhaps that's the secret, since the journalism schools don't appear to be turning out model representatives of their trade these days.  

Democrats: Stuck on Stupid since 2000.

America's Enemies Want Democrats to win

America's enemies, foreign and domestic (aka the Hate America First Crowd) want the Democrats to win.  This includes many "journalists" in the MSM.  The American people instinctively know this. That does not mean that all Democrat supporters hate America, but it should cause them to reflect on their support and wonder why they share a common desire with our enemies to have Democrats in power.  The article below about Iran's preference for Obama reminded me that Hitler probably preferred to deal with the more "flexible and rational" Chamberlin than the less flexible and rational Churchill. 

 

Larijani: Iran prefers Obama

Iranian parliament speaker says his country is leaning towards Democratic candidate in US presidential election 'because he is more flexible and rational'

AFP

Published: 
10.22.08, 21:47 / Israel News

Iranian parliament Speaker Ali Larijani said Wednesday that Iran would prefer Democrat Barack Obama in the White House next year. Larijani also dismissed any idea that the US would attack Iran.

"We are leaning more in favor of Barack Obama because he is more flexible and rational, even though we know American policy will not change that much," Larijani said at a press conference during a visit to Bahrain.

Our enemies want him to win

Our enemies want him to win because they know he is weak, and they can only take advantage of a weak and naive president.

Greta Sticks Up For Sarah

 

 

Making Fun of AGW http://giovanniworld.wordpress.com/  

Ct... Exactly...and the

Ct...

Exactly...and the majority of us here know it too.

Btw...as an aside, I just heard Greta say that CNN finally acknowledged the crap they did with Palin...about time, I haven't seen it yet, she used this as a tease...I hope to catch it, but my husband has his turn with the clicker...lol.

"America isn't the problem...America is the solution." ~ Rush Limbaugh

bt...

Evidently Greta has been badgering CNN for the past two days to get an apology out of them for what they said about Sarah. For a liberal, Greta sure is sticking up for Sarah alot. Good for her!

Greta Sticks Up For Sarah

 

 

Making Fun of AGW http://giovanniworld.wordpress.com/  

 

Are the Media a bunch of Bozos?

Don't these high paid media icons know that the first persons to get their head chopped off in a communist take over are the free-speaking media icons?

Wake-up Big-3 after he's in, your OUT!