For about 20 years, the Center for Media and Public Affairs content-analyzed broadcast news stories of presidential general election campaigns to measure the fairness of news coverage to the major party candidates. Through the 1990s and early 2000s, the bias in coverage seesawed between the Republican and the Democratic candidate. By 2004, a decided imbalance favored the Democratic candidate — 59 percent favorable for John Kerry vs. 37 percent for George W. Bush. Broadcast news tipped even further in 2008 when Barack Obama got 68 percent positive coverage compared with only 33 percent for John McCain.
When the 2016 election is analyzed, Donald Trump will only wish he had the kind of coverage accorded John McCain or George W. Bush. The news media coverage of Trump has been almost uniformly negative during this general election campaign. And that is a serious problem.
Too many journalists, anchors and talk hosts (outside of Fox News, which tilts in the other direction) are letting their biases against Trump show. Here are some examples:
Journalistic standards have been swept away. At one time, stories needed corroboration — more than one source was essential to merit publication. However, journalists have been willing to disseminate accusations about Trump without any corroboration. For example, Trump's most public accuser of sexual harassment is a woman who said he groped her on an airplane 35 years ago. No one else verified her story. It is unlikely anyone could. However, news organizations widely repeated her claim.
A double standard has been applied on past inappropriate statements or behavior. While journalists are willing to cover current bad behavior, such as Rep. Mark Foley’s solicitation of interns or Anthony Weiner’s sexting, they have considered past behavior, if not illegal, to be unnewsworthy. For example, John McCain’s past extramarital affairs were barely mentioned by the press. Nor did Newt Gingrich’s extramarital affairs receive much attention when he ran for president. However, Donald Trump’s private sexual boasts uttered 11 years ago became front-page news. Even if some of the accusations were true, why do they not fit in the same category as other candidates whose past personal behavior is kept off-limits by journalists?
Why are Trump’s past statements and activities newsworthy but not those of other politicians? The difference is that they fit news media assumptions about Trump. However, assumptions do not justify news. The same standard should apply to Donald Trump that is applied to other candidates.
Nonstories become stories. For example, The New York Times just published a listing of all of Donald Trump’s tweeted insults in the campaign. This is not a news story. In fact, The Times already did that kind of story earlier this year. This story, at this time, is simply an attempt to disparage Donald Trump.
Trump spokespersons are dismissed when they speak in support of their candidate. The standard practice has been to invite Trump supporters to talk shows and then to interrupt or dismiss them. Recently, Utah GOP Chairman James Evans experienced that treatment on CNN when the host abruptly ended the interview. This approach robs the viewer of the opportunity to hear both sides and decide for himself or herself.
This behavior has eased slightly in the past few days as journalists assume that Clinton has already won. Therefore, they may assume there is no further need to disparage Trump. Indeed, as the campaign ends, journalists can appear fair and balanced, particularly since it no longer matters. However, the damage to professional journalism is done.
Does this bias affect voters? It has little or no effect on the vast majority of voters. It is likely over 90 percent of voters have already decided whom to vote for. Yet the most susceptible voters to media messages are the still-undecided or those weakly attached to a candidate. In a close election, they can make a difference.
However it affects voters, this biased behavior does harm journalism. Journalists’ reputations already are at a low level today. This kind of conduct makes it worse. To be clear, I do not support Donald Trump for president. However, I do support fairness, and its demise is a tragedy.
Richard Davis is a professor of political science at Brigham Young University. He is the author of "The Liberal Soul: Applying the Gospel of Jesus Christ in Politics." His opinions do not necessarily reflect those of BYU.