After I posted this earlier in the week, persistent commenter Alexander Mitchell, who seems to have take it upon himself to challenge pretty much any political commentary I make here or on Facebook, checked in to note that “you simply cannot call the subjective analysis of media coverage ‘factual.'” And he was right (stopped clock and all that…).
You can, however, find considerable evidence which supports the Pew Foundation findings and here’s a nice rant on the topic:
As if to prove the truth of this study, The Hill ran with an amazing headline today:
Hmmm. Let’s see. If half of Americans believe he doesn’t deserve re-election, then that means the other half does, right? Which means that headline could easily have been flipped around to read “Half of Americans believe Obama deserves re-election.” And if that headline could have been flipped and wasn’t, one might ask why? Here’s another way they could have worded it: “Americans evenly split on whether Obama deserves re-election”. That would have been neutral, at least.
That headline came from The Hill, which seems to have a permanent right-wing tilt. But here’s one of The Politico’s headlines: Obama Gets Low Marks With Jews. Uh-oh, that’s a core constituency, right? Oops! The headline is a bit misleading, since the question was specific to how the conflict between Israel and Palestine is being handled, not his overall rating. Bet you’d never have guessed that from the headline though, which I’m sure was intended.
I’m still looking for that liberal media…
Go read it all.