Trump has been shouting “fake news” for some time now. This study reports some news outlets were as high as 93% negative in their reporting. He’s either really really bad, or their news reporting is really really bad.
Here are the numbers:
Even though NBC tied with CNN for the highest negative tone of news coverage, this is what they said about the study:
The survey’s methodology looked for newspapers looked at all articles except for letters to the editor, sports and obituaries. The inclusion of editor and op-ed pieces, then, could have played a role in skewing the data somewhat.
The question, of course, is whether Trump has brought the negativity on himself or has been the victim of a press determined to make him look bad.
“The fact that Trump has received more negative coverage than his predecessor is hardly surprising. The early days of his presidency have been marked by far more missteps and miss-hits, often self-inflicted, than any presidency in memory, perhaps ever,” Patterson wrote.
“Nevertheless, the sheer level of negative coverage gives weight to Trump’s contention, one shared by his core constituency, that the media are hell bent on destroying his presidency,” he added.
Of course, is there a cause and effect for this negative tone. Did Trump cause the negativity or did the news outlets precipitate the negativity? The press is a formidable foe, and it seems there is universal agreement that the top three negative reporting news outlets (CNN, NBC and CBS) are clearly anti-Trump and have left/Democratic leanings. So, maybe, just maybe Occam’s Razor is correct that the simplest explanation is the best explanation, and the negative reporting is at least substantially to blame for exacerbating this national nightmare even if you do not believe they caused it. I go with the former and not the latter.
Interestingly enough, Fox News had a near 50-50 rating consistent with their claim of “fair and balanced” at 52% negative stories. And Fox is often accused (rightfully so) with conservative and Trump leanings, yet the tone is pretty evenly divided.
One way to help separate the wheat from the chaff in a news story, especially on cable, are both sides represented on an issue and is the questioning by the host somewhat objective and challenging of those interviewed.
Of course, you know I would come up with a Latin phrase identifying a logical fallacy with making any connection between the two —
cum hoc ergo propter hoc (“with this, therefore because of this”), in which two events occur simultaneously or the chronological ordering is insignificant or unknown.
Or as we said when younger and less politically correct. Sometimes “shit just happens”.
However, the minimal value of this study provides all with pause to wonder about the news stories accuracy and bias. With anonymous sources with no accountability providing second and third information, it cannot help to be more careful what we read and listen to.
Although NBC did a written story, I could only find a youtube video showing FNC reporting on the study. My search words were “harvard school of politics negative news study trump”. Doesn’t mean noone else wished to air potential dirty laundry and report honestly. Just means no one posted it on youtube.