United States--2012 FDA Presidential Election Media Study

FDA Media Study of the 2012 American Presidential Election

Media Study Completed December 17, 2012

Executive Summary

The FDA measured significant bias in total campaign news coverage for Barack Obama over Mitt Romney, 54 percent to 44.75 percent and almost non-existent campaign coverage of third-party presidential candidates. As examples, only one day in the last 32 days of the American presidential election did Romney have more news coverage than Obama, and Obama had overall more positive news coverage and less negative news coverage than Romney. The FDA’s total measurements correlate exactly in ranking to the U.S. popular vote results, and very similar in terms of percentages of candidates’ coverage and percentages of candidates’ popular votes with an average deviation of 1.07 percent. The FDA Media Study pertains to the last 32 days of the 2012 American Presidential Election. The FDA data collectors tracked media biases in the U.S. national newspaper, radio, and television sectors including online content, and collected 7,924 data points. The FDA data is based on 47.66 percent of the national newspaper market, 21.91 percent of the radio news/talk/information market, and 97.72 percent of the National News Networks, Cable News, and Public News market. Overall, the FDA media study presents significant evidence that the U.S. national media limited electoral discourse and influenced the 2012 U.S. presidential election outcome, rather than fully inform the American electorate about their electoral choices. Based on the 2012 FDA Electoral Fairness Audit Report on the U.S. and the media study measurements, the FDA recommends that the American national media be regulated through legislated Code of Conduct during the 60 and 30 day federal electioneering periods, in order to support broad and balanced electoral discourse, and a fully informed electorate. Presently, the American federal electoral system allows U.S. national media companies/programs/shows to have an unregulated and imbalanced influence on electoral discourse, and ultimately undue influence on federal election outcomes, thereby undermining American democracy.

Prepared By

Mr. Stephen Garvey, Executive Director Foundation for Democratic Advancement, Bachelor of Arts in Political Science, University of British Columbia and Master of Philosophy in Environment and Development, University of Cambridge.

Purpose of the Media Study

The purpose of the Foundation for Democratic Advancement (FDA)’s media study (the Study) is to determine the percentage of election coverage by major media for the five American presidential candidates. This Study is an extension of the FDA’s 2012 electoral fairness audit of the American federal electoral system, in which America received a failing score of 42.5 percent for legislation pertaining to media political content.

The goal of the FDA's media study is to give Americans and other stakeholders objective data on election coverage by major media outlets and of the presidential candidates during the last 32 days of the 2012 American Presidential Election. Members of the American House of Congress and Senate may want to use the report’s measurements, findings, and recommendations as a basis for regulating private and public media during the 60 day federal campaign period. The American electorate may want to use the report’s measurements and findings to help determine their media information sources in future elections.

The views in this media study are the views of the FDA only. The FDA members are in no way affiliated with Federal Election Commission or any of America's registered/non-registered political parties, or any of the American media corporations. The Study is an independent assessment based on objectivity, transparency and non-partisanship. The FDA assumes no responsibility or liability for any errors in its data collection or inaccuracies in its research of relevant corporate and government documents.

About the Foundation for Democratic Advancement

The Foundation for Democratic Advancement (FDA) is an international independent, non-partisan democracy organization. The FDA’s mission is

to measure, study, and communicate the impact of government processes on a free and democratic society.

Overall, the FDA works

1. to ensure that people become more knowledgeable about the outcomes of government processes and can then make decisions that are more informed;

2. to get people involved in monitoring government processes at all levels of government and in providing sound, practical, and effective suggestions. (For more information on the FDA visit: www.democracychange.org)

Foundation for Democratic Advancement | 2012 U.S. Media Election Study Page 2

To ensure its objectivity and independence, the FDA does not conduct privately paid research. However, if you or your organization has an important research idea or are aware of an important issue on government processes, the FDA is available to listen to your idea or issue and possibly help raise public awareness by initiating and leading change through report research and analysis. Please contact the FDA at (403) 669-8132 or email us at [email protected] for more information.

An online version of this report can be found at: www.democracychange.orgFor further information and/or comments on this report please contact Mr. Stephen Garvey at [email protected]


Table of Contents

Introduction 5

Chapter 1: Media Study of the 2012 U.S. Presidential Election 7American Media Corporations in Study 8Corporate Ownership of American Media 9American National Newspapers 9American National Radio 15American National Television 22

U.S. National Press Results 28Analysis 32

U.S. National Radio Results 33Analysis 37

U.S. National Television Results 38Analysis 42

Chapter 2: Total America Media Study Results 43Analysis 47

Chapter 3: Analysis 50

Chapter 4: Conclusion 56

Chapter 5: Recommendations 57

References 60

Research Methodology 63

Appendix: 2012 FDA Global Electoral Fairness Audit Report of the United States Federal Electoral System 67

FDA Media Study Team & Associates 74


Introduction

The FDA's study on the American national media during the 2012 U.S. Presidential Election is based findings on non-partisanship and objectivity.

The media study involved three main components:

1. Identify major American national media companies/programs/shows in the press, radio, and television, and their corporate ownership.

2. Collect data on the selected American national media from October 6, 2012 to November 6, 2012.

3. Compile and analyze data.

Using media circulation and ownership data for America, the FDA identified the major media corporations in the press, radio, and television and chose major media companies/programs/shows in each sector for the Study. This approach allowed the FDA to focus on companies/programs/shows with a large market share, rather than concentrate on every American media company/program/show.

The FDA data collection team is comprised of twelve FDA members and each individual focused on a particular media company/program/show whether a newspaper, radio program, and television news broadcast. The collection team used spreadsheets to capture specific election content on the biases on each relevant story.

Members entered media data into a master spreadsheet to determine percentages. The FDA analyzed the results in relation and comparison to the 2012 FDA Electoral Fairness Audit Report on the U.S. Federal Electoral System and the 2012 American presidential popular vote results.

The report is limited in that it does not include every American company/program/show. However, by covering the major media outlets in each sector, the FDA is able to show evidence of the percentage of media coverage during the last thirty-two days of the American Presidential Election. The report is also limited in its focus on the last thirty-two days of the campaign period as opposed to the entire sixty-day campaign period for electioneering communication (unofficially known as from the U.S. labor Day to the first Tuesday in November) (U.S. Code, Title 5, Section 4508 and Code of Federal Regulations, Article 100.29). The FDA has no data on the first 28 days of this election period. There may or may not be a correlation in media coverage between the two pars of the campaign period. The FDA believes that although the 2012 American election was characterized by a two candidate race this in of itself does not justify the almost 10 percent bias in total coverage for Obama over Romney, or the almost non-existent coverage of third-party presidential candidates.

The FDA acknowledges that due to the 1st Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and various U.S. Supreme Court decisions on the importance and protection of free political speech, most recently


the Citizens United ruling, American public and private media has no legal requirement to provide the electorate with broad, balanced, and complete election coverage and that the onus is not solely on the media to inform the public. The electorate should also make efforts to gather information and form conclusions on its own volition, and even set up their own media companies and new sources if they are not satisfied with the news of the current media. Yet, the FDA believes that during an election period, legislation should mandate broad, balanced, and complete campaign coverage by the media in order for citizens to have a reasonable opportunity to make informed decisions on Election Day. The onus should not be fully on citizens to become media persons or form media companies to generate alternate media content. Democracy and elections are not solely about freedom; fairness and equality are integral parts as well. Freedom left unregulated like in the financial markets will likely lead to self-interested actions which are detrimental to the public good. Similarly, an unregulated media will lead to similar outcomes as this report shows. In democracy and elections a balance must be struck between freedom and the public good. As articulated in the Research Methodology for the 2012 FDA Audit Report on the United States: “Excessive political freedom would likely lead to a plutocracy, and excessive political equality would likely lead to communism” (Foundation for Democratic Advancement, 2012). (For more discussion on the democratic grounds for broad, balanced, and complete campaign coverage, see the Conclusion and Recommendations on pages 57 and 60.)


Chapter One: American National Media Election Content

Chapter One will focus on the U.S. media ownership concentration and the FDA's data collection results for the thirty-two days of the 2012 American Presidential Election

Chapter Summary: The FDA media study focuses on twelve major corporations from American national newspaper, radio, and television sectors. In the newspaper sector, the FDA focuses specifically on the Chicago Tribune, LA Times, New York Times, San Jose Mercury News, USA Today , Wall Street Journal, and Washington Post; in the radio sector, the FDA focuses on the Don Imus Show, Laura Ingram Show, NPR’s Morning Edition (Public News) NPR’s Evening News (Public News), and the Rush Limbaugh Show; and in the television sector, the FDA focuses on ABC News, CBS News, CNN, Fox News, MSNBC News, NBC News, and PBS (The News Hour). The data collection results show overwhelming bias in coverage to Barack Obama and Mitt Romney over third-party presidential candidates, and overall bias to Obama over Romney 54 percent total coverage to 44.75 percent, and more stories with positive bias for Obama and more stories with negative bias for Romney (based percentage breakdown of biased stories). In addition, the FDA researchers identified ownership concentration issues in the national television sector, in which for example ABC News, CBS News, and NBC News have 82.22 percent of the National News Networks, Cable News, and Public News market in terms of prime time audience. In the radio sector, Bain Capitol/Thomas H. Lee Partners have control and/or access to 41.08 percent of the 14,278 full powered U.S. radio stations. In the newspaper sector, the top ten U.S. newspapers have 66.84% of the U.S. newspaper market (for the top 100 U.S. newspapers) in terms of circulation.

Introduction: The Chapter is divided into three sections: American national media corporations in study, corporate ownership concentrations, and data collection results for American national newspaper, radio, and television sectors. The FDA's data collection for newspaper and television sectors includes online data. For information on research and data collection methodologies see the Research Methodology chapter on page 63.


American National Media in Study

National Press (plus their online content)

Chicago TribuneLA TimesNew York TimesSan Jose Mercury NewsUSA Today Wall Street JournalWashington Post

National Radio

Don Imus ShowLaura Ingram ShowNPR’s Morning Edition (Public News)Rush Limbaugh Show

National Television (plus their online content)

ABC News CBS NewsCNNFox NewsMSNBC NewsNBC NewsPBS News Hour


Corporate Media Ownership of Newspaper Companies

American National Press in Media Study

The Tribune Company owns the Chicago TribuneThe Tribune Company owns the LA TimesThe New York Times Company owns the New York Times The Media News Group owns the San Jose Mercury The Gannett Company owns the USA TodayThe News Corporation owns the New Wall Street JournalThe Washington Post owns the Washington Post

Newspaper Ownership of Newspaper Companies

Gannett Company

Newspaper companies in top 100 in terms of circulation:

USA Today The Arizona Republic Detroit Free PressThe Indianapolis StarThe Cincinnati EnquirerThe Courier-JournalThe TennesseanDemocrat and ChronicleThe Des Moines RegisterAsbury Park PressThe News Journal

Total daily and Sunday circulation: 6,258,549 (Audit Bureau of Circulations, 2012. Via Wikipedia, List of Newspapers in the United States by Circulation, 2012)

News Corporation

Newspaper companies in top 100:

The Wall Street JournalNew York Post



Media News Group


San Jose Mercury NewsThe Denver PostSt. Paul Pioneer PressThe Detroit NewsThe Salt Lake TribuneLos Angeles Daily NewsPress-Telegram


The New York Times Company


The New York TimesThe Boston GlobeTelegram & Gazette


The Washington Post

Newspaper companies in top 100:The Washington Post


Tribune Company


Los Angeles TimesChicago TribuneBaltimore SunOrlando Sentinel


South Florida Sun-SentinelThe Hartford CourantThe Morning Call


Total of daily and Sunday circulation of media companies in study: 25,107,983 (Audit Bureau of Circulations, 2012. Via Wikipedia, List of Newspapers in the United States by Circulation, 2012)

Total of daily and Sunday circulation of media companies (in top 100) not in study: 27,574,439 (Audit Bureau of Circulations, 2012. Via Wikipedia, List of Newspapers in the United States by Circulation, 2012)

Total ownership concentration of media companies in study as compared to newspaper companies in top 100:

47.66%

The largest media ownership concentration is the Gannett Company at 6,258,549 daily and Sunday circulation:

11.88% of newspaper market

The next largest media ownership concentration is the News Corporation at 5,186,598 daily and Sunday circulation:

9.85% of newspaper market

There are 44 newspaper companies in the top of 100 newspapers according to daily and Sunday circulation numbers.

The top 10 newspaper companies in terms of circulation numbers own 66.84% of the market. The 34 other newspaper companies own 33.16% of the market.


The pie chart captures the percentage of newspaper circulation covered by the FDA’s media study. The FDA determined newspaper circulation from the one hundred American newspapers with the highest circulation (Foundation for Democratic Advancement, 2012).


The pie chart captures the percentage of the U.S. newspaper market share by circulation for the top 44 newspaper companies (Foundation for Democratic Advancement, 2012).

U.S. Newspaper Ownership Group Quartiles Share of CirculationFirst Quartile (top 11 companies) 69.17%Second Quartile (companies ranked 12 to 22) 17.28%Third Quartile (companies ranked 23 to 33) 9.22%Fourth Quartile (companies ranked 34 to 44) 4.33%

Total 100.00%


The chart captures the cumulative percentage of FDA data points in relation to circulation of the top 44 U.S. newspaper corporations (including the top 100 U.S. newspapers in terms of circulation). The blue line represents what the cumulative distribution would look like if those 44 newspaper ownership groups each held an equal share of the market. The red line shows the actual lopsided ownership pattern and the resulting skew in the share of market. The vertical axis represents the cumulative percentage of the newspaper market in terms of audience. (Foundation for Democratic Advancement, 2012).


Total daily and Sunday circulation

U.S. National Newspapers in Study Daily and Sunday Circulation NumbersChicago Tribune 1,194,030LA Times 1,554,132New York Times 3,590,004San Jose Mercury News 1,266,044USA Today 1,817,446

Wall Street Journal 4,196, 879Washington Post 1,226,916Total Daily and Sunday Circulation 10,648,572

Total Daily and Sunday Circulation for Top 20 Newspapers

24,255,353

Percentage of Circulation of Newspapers in Study in Terms of the Top 20 Newspapers

43.90%

Total Daily and Sunday Circulation for Top 100 Newspapers

52,682,422

Percentage of Circulation of Newspapers in Study within Top 100 Newspapers

20.21%

Circulation numbers based on the first 6 month period of 2012 ended March 31, 2012.

(Audit Bureau of Circulations, 2012. Via Wikipedia, List of Newspapers in the United States by Circulation, 2012)


American National Radio in Study

Don Imus ShowLaura Ingram ShowNPR’s Morning Edition (Public News)Rush Limbaugh Show

Ownership of American National Radio in Study

1. Bain Capitol/Thomas H. Lee Partners (Clear Channel) owns the Rush Limbaugh Show

Other Bain Capital/Thomas H. Lee Partners’ media ownership:

Radio: 866 radio stations and Premiere Radio Networks (a national radio network that produces, distributes or represents approximately 90 syndicated radio programs, serves nearly 5,800 radio station affiliates and has over 213 million weekly listeners. Programs include the Rush Limbaugh Show, Glenn Beck and the Sean Hannity Show); Fox Sports Radio; Fox News Radio; Australian Radio Network

Other: Katz Media (radio advertising broker); American Outdoor Advertising (freepress.net, 2012)

2. NPR non-profit corporation privately and publicly funded and acts a national syndicator to a network of 900 U.S. public radio stations (Wikipedia, NPR, 2012).

3. Fox News Network owns Imus in the Morning; Fox News Network is owned by the News Corporation (freepress.net, 2012).

4. Laura Ingraham show owned by MediaBlue Nox, c/o Metrologo LLC (The Ingraham show had been distributed by the Talk Radio Network.) On businessprofiles.com MediaBlue Nox is listed as “dissolved.” It is unclear the viewership of the Laura Ingraham show. Although Talk Radio Network says on its website it is second largest national provider of talk radio shows and it lists 40 radio stations (trncorporate.com, 2012; tunein.com, Talk Radio Network Radio Stations, 2012; Lauraingraham.com, Terms and Conditions, 2012).

Number of Radio Stations in America

14,278 full power radio stations: 4,778 AM, 6533 FM, and 3,417 educational FM. There are 859 lower power FM stations. Lower power FM stations are only accessible by noncommercial educational entities and public safety and transportation organizations, (Benton Foundation. (2012) via the Federal Communications Commission, March 2011; Federal Communications Commission, Low Power FM Broadcast Radio Stations, 2012).


There are 70 plus radio networks in the United States. (Wikipedia, Radio in the United States, and List of United States Radio Networks, 2012). Media corporations operate a number of these networks such as:

Dial Global, a subsidiary of Triton Media Group, operates the followingnetworks:Source Max Radio NetworkCBS Radio NetworkNBC Radio NetworkNBC Sports RadioNeXt Radio NetworkWONE Radio NetworkWaitt Radio Networks (Dial Global Local)Dial Global Total (amalgamation of Transtar Radio Networks and Jones RadioNetworks)Westwood One (Wikipedia, List of United States Radio Networks, 2012).

Disney operates the following radio networks:ABC News Radio (Provides news programming to Cumulus Media Networks)ESPN RadioRadio Disney (Wikipedia, List of United States Radio Networks, 2012).

Radio Ownership Concentration Issue

Bain Capitol /Thomas H. Lee Partners (Clear Channel) has an estimated 5000 station affiliates through the Premier Radio Network and owns 866 radio stations (freepress.net, 2012). The FDA researchers assume that Bain Capitol/Thomas H. Lee Partners have access to: 5866 radio stations. (5000 station affiliates plus 866 radio stations)

There are 14,278 full powered American radio stations (Benton Foundation, 2012 via the Federal Communications Commission, March 2011).

Bain Capitol/Thomas H. Lee Partners have access to 41.08 percent of American radio stations.

Talk Radio Audiences

1. Rush Limbaugh Show

According to TALKERS magazine (spring of 2012), the top talk radio audiences totaled approximately:

141, 250, 000, 000 (comprised of the top 38 radio talk shows)


The Rush Limbaugh Show, with an estimated audience of 14,750,000 (TALKERS magazine, 2012), has 10.44 percent of the talk radio market (top 38 talk shows).

Bain Capitol/Thomas H. Lee Partners through the Premier Radio Network own Rush Limbaugh Show, Sean Hannity Show, and Glenn Beck Show. These shows have an estimated audience of 37 million (TALKERS magazine, 2012), or 26.19% of the audience for the top 38 American talk radio shows.

2. NPR’s Morning Edition:

NPR’s Morning Edition audience is estimated at 14 million (per week) (Ledbetter, 2011).

3. Imus in the Morning audience is estimated at 2.75 million (TALKERS magazine, 2012).

4. Laura Ingraham show audience is estimated at 5.75 million (TALKERS magazine, 2012).

Total American radio audience

The American news/talk/information radio audience is estimated at around 170 million (Foundation for Democratic Advancement, 2012 via data from the Pew Research Center, State of the Media, 2012).

In this study, the FDA tracked four radio news programs with an estimated audience of:

37.25 million

The FDA tracked radio shows capture 21.91 percent of the American news/talk/information market.


The pie chart captures Bain Capitol/Thomas H. Lee Partners’ percentage of control and access to American radio stations. Bain Capitol/Thomas H. Lee Partners have an estimated 5000 station affiliates through the Premier Radio Network and own 866 radio stations. There are 14,278 full powered radio stations in the United States (Foundation for Democratic Advancement, 2012).


The pie chart captures Bain Capitol/Thomas H. Lee Partners’ market share of the American talk radio market. The FDA determines market share based on the size of talk radio audiences, and the FDA limited the radio talk show market to the most popular 38 American radio talk shows (Foundation for Democratic Advancement, 2012).


The pie chart captures the percentage of the total national radio news market covered by FDA data collectors. The percentages are based on radio audience numbers for the news/talk/information radio sector (Foundation for Democratic Advancement, 2012).


American National Television in Study

ABC News CBS NewsCNNFox NewsMSNBC NewsNBC NewsPBS (The News Hour)

National Television Network News

ABC News CBS NewsNBC News

National Television Cable News:

CNNMSNBC NewsFox NewsPBS (The News Hour)

Other National Television Cable News:

CNBCHLN

Corporate Media Ownership of the American National News Networks, Cable News, and Public News

1. Comcast Corporation owns NBC, MSNBC, and CNBC.

Comcast Corporation media ownership:

TV: NBCUniversal; twenty-four television stations and the NBC television network; Telemundo; USA Network; SyFy; CNBC; MSNBC; Bravo; Oxygen; Chiller; CNBC World; E!; the Golf Channel; Sleuth; mun2; Universal HD; VERSUS; Style; G4; Comcast SportsNet (Philadelphia), Comcast SportsNet Mid-Atlantic (Baltimore/Washington, D.C.), Cable Sports Southeast, Comcast SportsNet Chicago, MountainWest Sports Network, Comcast SportsNet California (Sacramento), Comcast SportsNet New England (Boston), Comcast SportsNet Northwest (Portland, Ore.), Comcast Sports Southwest (Houston), Comcast SportsNet Bay Area (San Francisco), New England Cable News (Boston), Comcast Network Philadelphia, Comcast


Network Mid-Atlantic (Baltimore/Washington, D.C.); the Weather Channel (25 percent stake); A&E (16 percent stake); the History Channel (16 percent stake); the Biography Channel (16 percent stake); Lifetime (16 percent stake); the Crime and Investigation Channel (16 percent stake); Pittsburgh Cable News Channel (30 percent stake); FEARnet (31 percent stake); PBS KIDS Sprout (40 percent stake); TV One (34 percent stake); Houston Regional Sports Network (23 percent stake); SportsNet New York (8 percent stake)

Online Holdings: MSNBC.com [full owner recently]; Hulu (32 percent stake); DailyCandy; iVillage; Fandango (freepress.net, 2012).

2. CBS Corporation owns CBS News.

CBS Corporation media ownership:

TV: Twenty-nine television stations and CBS Television Studios; CBS Entertainment; CBS News; CBS Sports; CBS television stations; CBS Television Studios; CBS Studios International; CBS Television Distribution; the CW; Showtime; CBS College Sports Network; CBS Television Network; Smithsonian Networks

Radio: CBS Radio and 130 radio stations (freepress.net, 2012).

3. News Corporation owns Fox News.

News Corporation media ownership:

TV: Twenty-seven television stations and FOX Broadcasting Company (FOX Network, MyNetworkTV); FOX News; FOX Business; FOX News Radio Network; FOX News Talk Channel; FSN (12 regional sports networks); FX; SPEED; FUEL TV; Fox College Sports; Fox Movie Channel; Fox Soccer Channel; Fox Soccer Plus; Fox Pan American Sports; Fox Deportes; Big Ten Network; National Geographic U.S.; Nat Geo Adventure; Nat Geo Music; Nat Geo Wild; Fox International Channels; Utilisima; Fox Crime; NEXT; FOX History & Entertainment; the Voyage Channel; STAR World; STAR Movies; NGC Network International; NGC Network Latin America; LAPTV; Movie City; City Mix; City Family; City Stars; City Vibe; the Film Zone; Cinecanal; Elite Sports Limited; BabyTV; STAR India; STAR Taiwan; ESPN STAR Sports; Shine Limited

Online Holdings: Hulu.com (32 percent minority share) (freepress.net, 2012).

4. Walt Disney Company owns ABC News.

Walt Disney Company media ownership:

TV: Eight television stations and the ABC television network; ESPN; Disney Channels Worldwide; ABC Family; SOAPnet Networks; A&E (42 percent stake); Lifetime Television (42 percent stake); the History Channel (42 percent stake); Lifetime Movie Network (42 percent


stake); the Biography Channel (42 percent stake); History International [renamed H2] (42 percent stake); Lifetime Real Women (42 percent stake); Live Well Network (42 percent stake)

Radio: ESPN Radio Network; Radio Disney (freepress.net, 2012).

5. Time Warner Company owns CNN and HLN (Wikipedia, CNN and HLN, 2012).

6. PBS is owned by 354 U.S. TV stations which have collective ownership (Wikipedia, PBS, 2012). There are 1,774 full power television stations in the United States (Benton Foundation. (2012) via the Federal Communications Commission, March 2011).

Viewership of the American National News Networks, Cable News, and Public News

8.75 million (daily audience 2010/2011) NBC Nightly News

8.75 million (daily audience 2010/2011) ABC World News

5.97 million (daily audience 2010/2011) CBS Evening News

1.1 million (daily audience (2010/2011) PBS News Hour

1.9 million (daily mean prime time audience 2011) Fox News

773,000 (daily mean prime time audience 2011) MSNBC

654,500 (daily mean prime time audience 2011) CNN

385,500 (daily mean prime time audience 2011) HLN (Foundation for Democratic, 2012 via data from the Pew Research Center, State of the Media, 2012).

291, 000 (daily audience during business day first quarter 2012) CNBC (Talking Biz News, 2011).

Total Daily Viewers of National News Networks, Cable News, and Public News:

28.547 million

The FDA data collection covers 27.8975 million (97.72%) of the National News Networks, Cable News, and Public News market in terms media corporations in the study.

Media Ownership Concentration Issues

NBC Nightly News and ABC World News have 61.03 percent of the National News Networks, Cable News, and Public News market in terms of prime time audience.


NBC Nightly News and ABC World News each have 30.52 percent of the National News Networks, Cable News, and Public News market in terms of prime time audience.

NBC Nightly News, ABC World News, and CBS Evening News have 82.22 percent of the National News Networks, Cable News, and Public News market in terms of prime time audience.

The pie chart captures the percentage of prime time news market share ABC, NBC, and CBS has compared to all other U.S. national news networks, cable news, and public news networks in terms of prime time audience (Foundation for Democratic Advancement, 2012).

Cross Ownership Between Three Major Media Sectors

CBS Corporation

TV: Twenty-nine television stations and CBS Television Studios; CBS Entertainment; CBS News; CBS Sports; CBS television stations; CBS Television Studios; CBS Studios International; CBS Television Distribution; the CW; Showtime; CBS College Sports Network; CBS Television Network; Smithsonian Networks

Radio: CBS Radio and 130 radio stations


Online Holdings: CBS Interactive; CNET

Print: Simon & Schuster; Watch! Magazine; Pocket Books; Scribner; Free Press (publishing house) (freepress.net, 2012).

Comcast Corporation

TV: NBCUniversal; twenty-four television stations and the NBC television network; Telemundo; USA Network; SyFy; CNBC; MSNBC; Bravo; Oxygen; Chiller; CNBC World; E!; the Golf Channel; Sleuth; mun2; Universal HD; VERSUS; Style; G4; Comcast SportsNet (Philadelphia), Comcast SportsNet Mid-Atlantic (Baltimore/Washington, D.C.), Cable Sports Southeast, Comcast SportsNet Chicago, MountainWest Sports Network, Comcast SportsNet California (Sacramento), Comcast SportsNet New England (Boston), Comcast SportsNet Northwest (Portland, Ore.), Comcast Sports Southwest (Houston), Comcast SportsNet Bay Area (San Francisco), New England Cable News (Boston), Comcast Network Philadelphia, Comcast Network Mid-Atlantic (Baltimore/Washington, D.C.); the Weather Channel (25 percent stake); A&E (16 percent stake); the History Channel (16 percent stake); the Biography Channel (16 percent stake); Lifetime (16 percent stake); the Crime and Investigation Channel (16 percent stake); Pittsburgh Cable News Channel (30 percent stake); FEARnet (31 percent stake); PBS KIDS Sprout (40 percent stake); TV One (34 percent stake); Houston Regional Sports Network (23 percent stake); SportsNet New York (8 percent stake)

Online Holdings: MSNBC.com (50 percent stake); Hulu (32 percent stake); DailyCandy; iVillage; Fandango

Telecom: Clearwire Communications (9 percent stake) (freepress.net, 2012).

News Corporation

TV: Twenty-seven television stations and FOX Broadcasting Company (FOX Network, MyNetworkTV); FOX News; FOX Business; FOX News Radio Network; FOX News Talk Channel; FSN (12 regional sports networks); FX; SPEED; FUEL TV; Fox College Sports; Fox Movie Channel; Fox Soccer Channel; Fox Soccer Plus; Fox Pan American Sports; Fox Deportes; Big Ten Network; National Geographic U.S.; Nat Geo Adventure; Nat Geo Music; Nat Geo Wild; Fox International Channels; Utilisima; Fox Crime; NEXT; FOX History & Entertainment; the Voyage Channel; STAR World; STAR Movies; NGC Network International; NGC Network Latin America; LAPTV; Movie City; City Mix; City Family; City Stars; City Vibe; the Film Zone; Cinecanal; Elite Sports Limited; BabyTV; STAR India; STAR Taiwan; ESPN STAR Sports; Shine Limited

Online Holdings: Hulu.com (32 percent minority share)

Print: HarperCollins Publishers; the New York Post; the Daily News; News International (the Times; the Sunday Times; the Sun); News Limited (146 newspapers in Australia); Dow Jones (Wall Street Journal, Barron's, SmartMoney, Factiva, Dow Jones Newswires, Dow Jones Local Media, Dow Jones VentureSource) (freepress.net, 2012).


Gannett Corporation

TV: Twenty-three television stations

Online Holdings: CareerBuilder.com; MomsLikeMe.com; ShopLocal.com; Cars.com; Apartments.com; CareerSite.biz; Livestream.com; Metromix.com; Ongo, Inc.; Reviewed.com; SavvyShopperDeals.com; Homefinder.com; BNOT.com; Nurse.com

Print: USA Today; over 600 magazines and other non-daily print publications; Clipper Magazine; Mint Magazine; Gannett Government Media; Gannett Education; Newsquest (U.K.) (freepress.net, 2012).

Tribune Company

TV: Twenty-three television stations and the Food Network (30 percent stake); WGN America; CLTV (Chicagoland’s Television); Tribune Entertainment

Radio: One radio station

Online Holdings: Zap2it.com; TribuneDirect.com; MetroMix.com (minority stake); CareerBuilder.com (minority stake); Apartments.com (minority stake); Cars.com (minority stake); ForSaleByOwner.com; HomeFinder.com (minority stake); Healthkey.com; Topix.net (minority stake)

Print: Twelve daily newspapers (including the Los Angeles Times, the Chicago Tribune, the Baltimore Sun and the Hartford Courant); Chicago Magazine

Other: Tribune Media Services; Classified Ventures (minority stake) (freepress.net, 2012).

Washington Post Company

TV: Six television stations

Print: The Washington Post; the Herald; the Washington Post News Service; Post-Newsweek Media; Greater Washington Publishing; the Slate Group (Slate, the Root, Foreign Policy); El Tiempo Latino; Express Publications (Express, ExpressNightOut.com); Social Code; Classified Ventures (17 percent stake)

Telecommunications: Cable ONE, Inc.

Other: Kaplan (Kaplan Higher Education, Kaplan University, Kaplan Test Preparation, Kaplan International, Kaplan Ventures, Kaplan EduNeering, Kaplan Learning Technologies, the Kidum Group, Kaplan Continuing Education, Kaplan Global Solutions, Colloquy, Kaplan Virtual Education and Kaplan VC LLC); Avenue 100 Media Solutions, Inc.; Bowater Mersey Paper Company (49 percent stake) (freepress.net, 2012).


Media Study Data Collection Results

American National Press

Overall data collection totals for newspaper news coverage and biases (positive, neutral, negative). Each data point in the table below represents a recorded bias from a particular news story/information over the last 32 days of the 2012 U.S. Presidential Election:

Republican Party (Mitt Romney) TOTAL 186

5 44.83%

POSITIVE 403 21.61%

NEUTRAL 943 50.56%

NEGATIVE 519 27.83%

Democratic Party (Barack Obama) TOTAL

2226 53.51%

POSITIVE 716 32.17%

NEUTRAL 1175 52.79%

NEGATIVE 335 15.05%

Libertarian Party (Gary Johnson) TOTAL 35 0.84%

POSITIVE 9 25.71%

NEUTRAL 20 57.14%

NEGATIVE 6 17.14%

Green Party (Jill Stein) TOTAL 14 0.34%

POSITIVE 7 50.00%

NEUTRAL 6 42.86%

NEGATIVE 1 7.14%

Constitution Party (Virgil Goode) TOTAL 14 0.34%

POSITIVE 5 35.71%

NEUTRAL 8 57.14%

NEGATIVE 1 7.14%

All Other Parties/Candidates TOTAL 6 0.14%

POSITIVE 5 83.33%

NEUTRAL 1 16.67%

NEGATIVE 0 0.00%

TOTAL BIASES

4160 100%


The pie chart captures the percentage breakdown of the total national press coverage in terms of stories with positive, neutral, and negative bias. The breakdown is based on the FDA’s newspaper data collection in the last 32 days of the U.S. presidential election, in which 4,160 data points were collected (Foundation for Democratic Advancement, 2012).


Ranking of American national press total coverage

Presidential Candidates Total Press Coverage1. Barack Obama 53.51%2. Mitt Romney 44.83%3. Gary Johnson 0.89%4. Jill Stein 0.35%5. Virgil Goode 0.35%6. All Other Candidates/Parties 0.15%

Ranking of American national press total positive biased coverage

Presidential Candidates Total Positive Coverage1. Barack Obama 32.17%2. Mitt Romney 21.61%3. Gary Johnson 0.89% (total coverage)4. Jill Stein 0.35% (total coverage)5. Virgil Goode 0.35% (total coverage)6. All Other Candidates/Parties 0.15% (total coverage)

Ranking of American national press total neutral biased coverage

Presidential Candidates Total Neutral Coverage1. Barack Obama 52.79%2. Mitt Romney 50.56%3. Gary Johnson 0.89% (total coverage)4. Jill Stein 0.35% (total coverage)5. Virgil Goode 0.35% (total coverage)6. All Other Candidates/Parties 0.15% (total coverage)

Ranking of American national press total negative biased coverage

Presidential Candidates Total Negative Coverage1. Mitt Romney 27.83%2. Barack Obama 15.05%3. Gary Johnson 0.89% (total coverage)4. Jill Stein 0.35% (total coverage)5. Virgil Goode 0.35% (total coverage)6. All Other Candidates/Parties 0.15% (total coverage)


The pie chart captures the total national press coverage (including online content) of the 2012 U.S. presidential candidates from the FDA’s 4,160 data points on the press (Foundation for Democratic Advancement, 2012).


Analysis of American National Newspaper Findings

Barack Obama had a clear advantage over Mitt Romney in the U.S. national press coverage of the 2012 presidential election. In the last 32 days of the election and based on the FDA’s data collection, Obama had 8.68 percent more total press coverage than Romney. More specifically, Obama had 10.56 percent more stories with positive bias than Romney, and Romney had 12.78 percent more stories with negative bias than Obama.

U.S. national press coverage of third-party presidential candidates was almost non-existent. In the last 32 days of the election and based on the FDA’s data collection, third-party candidates had 1.66 percent of the total press coverage, while Obama and Romney had 98.34 percent of the press coverage.

More than double of the total U.S. national press stories were of neutral bias:

51.46 percent neutral bias

48.24 percent either positive or negative bias.

The U.S. national press had 6.8 percent more stories with positive bias than stories with negative bias: 27.52 percent to 20.72 percent.


American National Radio

Overall data collection totals for radio news coverage and biases (positive, neutral, negative). Each data point in the table below represents a recorded bias from a particular news story/information over the last 32 days of the 2012 U.S. Presidential Election:

Republican Party (Mitt Romney) TOTAL 625 41.28%

POSITIVE 291 46.56%

NEUTRAL 195 31.20%

NEGATIVE 139 22.24%

Democratic Party (Barack Obama) TOTAL 883 58.32%

POSITIVE 91 10.31%

NEUTRAL 247 27.97%

NEGATIVE 545 61.72%


POSITIVE 1 20.00%

NEUTRAL 2 40.00%

NEGATIVE 2 40.00%


POSITIVE 0 0.00%

NEUTRAL 1 100.00%

NEGATIVE 0 0.00%


POSITIVE 0 0.00%

NEUTRAL 0 0.00%

NEGATIVE 0 0.00%


POSITIVE 0 0.00%

NEUTRAL 0 0.00%

NEGATIVE 0 0.00%

TOTAL BIASES

1514 100%


The pie chart captures the percentage breakdown of the total national radio coverage in terms of stories with positive, neutral, and negative bias. The breakdown is based on the FDA’s radio data collection in the last 32 days of the U.S. presidential election, in which 1,514 data points were collected (Foundation for Democratic Advancement, 2012).


Ranking of American national radio total coverage

Presidential Candidates Total Radio Coverage1. Barack Obama 58.32%2. Mitt Romney 41.28%3. Gary Johnson 0.33%4. Jill Stein 0.07%5. Virgil Goode 0.0%6. All Other Candidates/Parties 0.0%

Ranking of American national radio total positive biased coverage

Presidential Candidates Total Positive Coverage1. Mitt Romney 46.56%2. Barack Obama 10.31%3. Gary Johnson 0.06%4. Jill Stein 0.0%5. Virgil Goode 0.0%6. All Other Candidates/Parties 0.0%

Ranking of American national radio total neutral biased coverage

Presidential Candidates Total Neutral Coverage1. Mitt Romney 31.20%2. Barack Obama 27.97%3. Gary Johnson 0.13%4. Jill Stein 0.07%5. Virgil Goode 0.0%6. All Other Candidates/Parties 0.0%

Ranking of American national radio total negative biased coverage

Presidential Candidates Total Negative Coverage1. Barack Obama 61.72%2. Mitt Romney 22.24%3. Gary Johnson 0.13%4. Jill Stein 0.0%5. Virgil Goode 0.0%6. All Other Candidates/Parties 0.0%


The pie chart captures the total national radio coverage of the 2012 U.S. presidential candidates from the FDA’s 1,514 data points on the radio (Foundation for Democratic Advancement, 2012).


Analysis of American National Radio Findings

Barack Obama had a clear advantage over Mitt Romney in the U.S. national radio coverage of the 2012 election. In the last 32 days of the election and based on the FDA’s data collection, Obama had 17.04 percent more radio coverage than Romney.

However, Obama had 39.48 percent more negative radio coverage than Romney. In addition, Romney had 36.25 percent more positive radio coverage than Obama.

Romney and Obama had a similar percentage of neutral radio coverage, 31.20 percent for Romney to 27.97 percent for Obama.

U.S. national radio coverage of third-party presidential candidates was almost non-existent. In the last 32 days of the election and based on the FDA’s data collection, third-party candidates had 0.4 percent of the total radio coverage, while Obama and Romney had 99.6 percent of the radio coverage.

The U.S. national radio had 20.01 percent more content with negative bias than content with positive bias: 45.31 percent to 25.30 percent. Also, the U.S. national press had 15.92 percent more content with negative bias than content with neutral bias: 45.31 percent to 29.39 percent.

Bias Breakdown of National Radio:

Negative: 45.31%

Positive: 25.30%

Neutral: 29.39%


American National Television

Overall data collection totals for television news coverage and biases (positive, neutral, negative). Each data point in the table below represents a recorded bias from a particular news story/information over the last 32 days of the 2012 U.S. Presidential Election:


5 46.95%

POSITIVE 181 17.16%

NEUTRAL 572 54.22%

NEGATIVE 302 28.63%


1168 51.98%

POSITIVE 357 30.57%

NEUTRAL 598 51.20%

NEGATIVE 213 18.24%


POSITIVE 1 12.50%

NEUTRAL 7 87.50%

NEGATIVE 0 0.00%


POSITIVE 0 0.00%

NEUTRAL 7 87.50%

NEGATIVE 1 12.50%


POSITIVE 0 0.00%

NEUTRAL 7 100.00%

NEGATIVE 0 0.00%


POSITIVE 0 0.00%

NEUTRAL 1 100.00%

NEGATIVE 0 0.00%

TOTAL BIASES

2247 100%


The pie chart captures the percentage breakdown of the total national television coverage in terms of stories with positive, neutral, and negative bias. The breakdown is based on the FDA’s newspaper data collection in the last 32 days of the U.S. presidential election, in which 2,247 data points were collected (Foundation for Democratic Advancement, 2012).


Ranking of American national television total coverage

Presidential Candidates Total Television Coverage1. Barack Obama 51.98%2. Mitt Romney 46.95%3. Gary Johnson 0.36%4. Jill Stein 0.36%5. Virgil Goode 0.31%6. All Other Candidates/Parties 0.04%

Ranking of American national television total positive biased coverage

Presidential Candidates Total Positive Coverage1. Barack Obama 30.57%2. Mitt Romney 17.16%3. Gary Johnson 0.05%4. Jill Stein 0.0%5. Virgil Goode 0.0%6. All Other Candidates/Parties 0.0%

Ranking of American national television total neutral biased coverage

Presidential Candidates Total Neutral Coverage1. Mitt Romney 54.22%2. Barack Obama 51.20%3. Gary Johnson 0.32%4. Jill Stein 0.32%5. Virgil Goode 0.31%6. All Other Candidates/Parties 0.04%

Ranking of American national television total negative biased coverage

Presidential Candidates Total Negative Coverage1. Barack Obama 28.63%2. Mitt Romney 18.24%3. Gary Johnson 0.0%4. Jill Stein 0.05%5. Virgil Goode 0.0%6. All Other Candidates/Parties 0.0%


The pie chart captures the total national television coverage (including online content) of the 2012 U.S. presidential candidates from the FDA’s 2,247 data points on the television (Foundation for Democratic Advancement, 2012).


Analysis of American National Television Findings

Barack Obama had an advantage over Mitt Romney in the U.S. national television coverage of the 2012 election. In the last 32 days of the election and based on the FDA’s data collection, Obama had 5.03 percent more total television coverage than Romney. However, more significantly, Obama had 13.41 more positive television coverage than Romney, and Obama had 10.39 less negative television coverage than Romney. Both candidates had similar percentage of neutral coverage: 54.22 percent for Romney to 51.20 percent for Obama.

U.S. national television coverage of third-party presidential candidates was almost non-existent. In the last 32 days of the election and based on the FDA’s data collection, third-party candidates had 1.07 percent of the total television coverage, while Obama and Romney had 98.93 percent of the television coverage.

The U.S. national television had more than double neutral coverage of Obama and Romney than positive and negative coverage combined: 53.50 percent neutral coverage to 46.95 percent positive and negative coverage. Percentages of positive and negative television coverage differ by 1.03 percent: 23.99 percent positive coverage to 22.96 percent negative coverage.


Chapter Two: Total American Media Study Results

Chapter Two will show the FDA’s total media results for the last thirty days of the 2012 American Presidential Election

Overall data collection totals for all news coverage and biases (positive, neutral, negative). Each data point in the table below represents a recorded bias from a particular news story/information over the last 32 days of the 2012 U.S. Presidential Election:


5 44.75%

POSITIVE 875 24.68%

NEUTRAL 1710 48.24%

NEGATIVE 960 27.08%


4277 54.00%

POSITIVE 1164 27.22%

NEUTRAL 2020 47.23%

NEGATIVE 1093 25.56%


POSITIVE 11 22.92%

NEUTRAL 29 60.42%

NEGATIVE 8 16.67%


POSITIVE 7 30.43%

NEUTRAL 14 60.87%

NEGATIVE 2 8.70%


POSITIVE 5 23.81%

NEUTRAL 15 71.43%

NEGATIVE 1 4.76%


POSITIVE 5 71.43%

NEUTRAL 2 28.57%

NEGATIVE 0 0.00%

TOTAL 792 100%


BIASES 1

Positive Bias

26.17%

Neutral Bias47.43%

Negative Bias

26.40%

2012 U.S. Presidential Election: Percentage Breakdown of Bias in U.S. National MediaFoundation for Democratic Advancement

The pie chart captures the percentage breakdown of the total national media coverage in terms of stories with positive, neutral, and negative bias. The breakdown is based on the FDA’s data collection in the last 32 days of the U.S. presidential election, in which 7,921 data points were collected (Foundation for Democratic Advancement, 2012).


Ranking of American national media total coverage

Presidential Candidates Total Media Coverage1. Barack Obama 54%2. Mitt Romney 44.75%3. Gary Johnson 0.62%4. Jill Stein 0.30%5. Virgil Goode 0.27%6. All Other Candidates/Parties 0.09%

Ranking of American national media total positive biased coverage

Presidential Candidates Total Positive Coverage1. Barack Obama 27.22%2. Mitt Romney 24.68%3. Gary Johnson 0.14%4. Jill Stein 0.09%5. Virgil Goode 0.06%6. All Other Candidates/Parties 0.06%

Ranking of American national media total neutral biased coverage

Presidential Candidates Total Neutral Coverage1. Mitt Romney 48.24%2. Barack Obama 47.23%3. Gary Johnson 0.37%4. Virgil Goode 0.19%5. Jill Stein 0.18%6. All Other Candidates/Parties 0.03%

Ranking of American national media total negative biased coverage

Presidential Candidates Total Negative Coverage1. Mitt Romney 27.08%2. Barack Obama 25.56%3. Gary Johnson 0.1%4. Jill Stein 0.03%5. Virgil Goode 0.01%6. All Other Candidates/Parties 0.0%


1. Barack Obama

54%

2. Mitt Romney44.75%

3. All other candidates1.25%

Total U.S. National Media CoverageFoundation for Democratic Advancement

The pie chart captures the total national media coverage (including online content) of the 2012 U.S. presidential candidates from the FDA’s 7,921 data points (Foundation for Democratic Advancement, 2012).


Analysis of American National Press, Radio, and Television Findings

Barack Obama had a clear advantage over Mitt Romney in the U.S. national television coverage of the 2012 election. In the last 32 days of the election and based on the FDA’s data collection, Obama had 9.25 percent more total media coverage than Romney. This Obama advantage is increased by the facts that Obama had 2.54 percent more positive media coverage than Romney, and Obama had 1.52 percent less negative media coverage than Romney. Both candidates had similar percentage of neutral coverage: 48.24 percent for Romney to 47.23 percent for Obama.

U.S. national media coverage of third-party presidential candidates was almost non-existent. In the last 32 days of the election and based on the FDA’s data collection, third-party candidates had 1.25 percent of the total media coverage, while Obama and Romney had 98.75 percent of the television coverage.

The U.S. national media had 21.03 percent more content with neutral bias than content with negative bias: 47.43 percent to 26.40 percent. Also, the U.S. national media had 21.26 percent more content with neutral bias than content with positive bias: 47.43 percent to 26.17 percent. The U.S. national media’s negative coverage and positive coverage has a 0.33 percent difference.


The bar chart captures the total media exposure in terms of biases of the American political parties and their presidential candidates from the FDA data collection. The total of the negative, neutral, and positive biases for each party and candidate represents the total coverage for each party and candidate from the FDA data collection. The vertical axis in the bar chart represents the number of media data and thereby total coverage (Foundation for Democratic Advancement, 2012).


The bar chart captures the total media exposure in terms of percentage biases of the American political parties and their presidential candidates from the FDA data collection. The bar chart factors in percentage of coverage as well. Barack Obama had more total coverage than Mitt Romney. In addition, Romney had a greater percentage of negative coverage as compared to Obama, and Obama had a greater percentage of positive coverage as compared to Romney. The third-party candidates had 1.25 percent of the total media coverage from the FDA data collection of 7,921 data points (Foundation for Democratic Advancement, 2012).


Chapter Three: Analysis

Chapter Three will provide an overall analysis of the FDA’s media measurements.

In the three media areas, Barack Obama had a media coverage advantage over Mitt Romney. Overall, Obama had 9.25 percent more total media coverage than Romney.

In addition, Obama had more positive bias coverage and less negative bias coverage (than Romney) in all areas of the study with the exception of the national radio sector.

Even though Obama had 39.48 percent more negative coverage in the radio sector, Obama had 17.04 percent more total coverage in the radio sector than Romney.

The American election results were almost identical to the total media coverage results in terms of election ranking and very similar in terms of percentage of candidates’ media coverage and percentage of candidates’ popular vote with an average deviation of 1.07 percent.

FDA RESULTS

Democratic Party (Barack Obama) TOTAL 4,27

7 54.00%

Republican Party (Mitt Romney) TOTAL 3,54

5 44.75%Libertarian Party (Gary Johnson) TOTAL 48 0.61%Green Party (Jill Stein) TOTAL 23 0.29%Constitution Party (Virgil Goode) TOTAL 21 0.27%All Other Parties/Candidates TOTAL 7 0.09%

7,921

ACTUAL RESULTS - POPULAR VOTE

Democratic Party (Barack Obama)TOTA

L 65,464,068 50.95%

Republican Party (Mitt Romney)TOTA

L 60,781,275 47.31%

Libertarian Party (Gary Johnson)TOTA

L 1,272,558 0.99%

Green Party (Jill Stein)TOTA

L 465,766 0.36%

Constitution Party (Virgil Goode)TOTA

L 121,114 0.09%

All Other Parties/CandidatesTOTA

L 371,376 0.29%


128,476,157

U.S. Presidential Candidates

DIFFERENCE

FDA RANKING

ACTUAL RANKING

Democratic Party (Barack Obama) -2.55% 1 1Republican Party (Mitt Romney) 3.04% 2 2Libertarian Party (Gary Johnson) -0.38% 3 3Green Party (Jill Stein) -0.07% 4 4Constitution Party (Virgil Goode) 0.17% 5 5All Other Parties/Candidates -0.20% 6 6

6.42% Total Deviance

1.07%Average Deviance


Ranking of American national press total coverage compared to popular vote results

Presidential Candidates Total Press Coverage

2012 U.S. Presidential Popular Vote Results

1. Barack Obama 53.51% 50.95%2. Mitt Romney 44.83% 47.31%3. Gary Johnson 0.84% 0.99%4. Jill Stein 0.34% 0.36%5. Virgil Goode 0.34% 0.09%6. All Other Candidates/Parties 0.14% 0.29%

Ranking of American national radio total coverage compared to popular vote results

Presidential Candidates Total Radio Coverage



Ranking of American national television total coverage compared to popular vote results

Presidential Candidates Total Television Coverage



Ranking of American national media total coverage compared to popular vote results

Presidential Candidates Total Media Coverage


1. Barack Obama 54.0% 50.95%


2. Mitt Romney 44.75% 47.31%3. Gary Johnson 0.61% 0.99%4. Jill Stein 0.29% 0.36%5. Virgil Goode 0.27% 0.09%6. All Other Candidates/Parties 0.09% 0.29%

As shown in the tables above, the U.S. national television coverage most closely matched the U.S. popular vote results, followed by the national newspaper coverage, total media coverage, and national radio coverage.

The national radio sector was the most critical of the three media areas, as evidenced by the radio sector having 24.59 percent more negative bias than the national television sector, and 22.35 percent more negative bias than the national television sector.

The national television sector (of the three media areas) was the least critical, as evidenced by the television sector having 1.3 percent more neutral bias than the national newspaper sector, and 23.66 percent more neutral bias than the national radio sector.

In all three media sectors, the media coverage of third-party candidates was almost non-existent. All third-party candidates received 1.26 percent of the total media coverage as compared to 98.74 percent for Obama and Romney.

The FDA researchers identified ownership concentration issues in the U.S. national television, press, and radio sectors. The ownership issues are:

1. NBC Nightly News and ABC World News have 61.03 percent of the National News Networks, Cable News, and Public News market in terms of prime time audience.

NBC Nightly News, ABC World News, and CBS Evening News have 82.22 percent of the National News Networks, Cable News, and Public News market in terms of prime time audience.

Related to these ownership percentages, the national television sector as mentioned above was the least critical in content as compared to the newspaper and radio sectors. Also, there is cross-ownership between the three media sectors, so these television companies have even more influence over the American electorate. For example, CBS Corporation owns 29 television stations and CBS Radio and 130 radio stations.

2. Bain Capitol /Thomas H. Lee Partners (Clear Channel) has control and/or access to 41.08 percent of American radio stations. The American radio audience is around 170 million. However, Bain Capitol/Thomas H. Lee Partners have no cross-ownership in the newspaper and television sectors. Also, based on the FDA’s data collection, the radio sector has the most critical content as compared to the newspaper and television sectors. Further, Bain Capitol/Thomas H. Lee Partner’s have only 26.91 percent of the American talk radio show market (based on the audiences for the top 38 American talk radio shows) and control over 866 U.S. radio stations out of 14,278 U.S. radio stations.


3. The top 10 newspaper companies in terms of circulation numbers own 66.84% of the U.S. newspaper market. The 34 other newspaper companies own 33.16% of the U.S. newspaper market. These findings are based on a U.S. newspaper market defined by the 100 top U.S. newspapers in terms of circulation. The top 10 newspaper companies are independent of each other in terms of parent ownership. In this study, the national newspaper sector had the lowest negative bias coverage, and at the same time, the highest positive bias coverage.

The timeline chart captures the total media coverage of Obama and Romney, and in comparison to five major events in the last 32 days of the 2012 U.S. presidential election. In terms of overall


coverage, Obama received an increase in coverage from four of the five key political events identified in the chart. As illustrated in the timeline chart, the FDA researchers observed declines in campaign coverage for each of the four weekend periods included in the study. These declines are the result of talk radio broadcasts not being aired on the weekends, and declines in campaign coverage during weekend periods for the press and television.

Obama received a more sustained increase in coverage and higher coverage from the 4th debate (and final presidential debate) than he received from Hurricane Sandy.

In addition, Obama received the second highest daily coverage from the 3rd debate (second presidential debate). Obama had 192 data points compared to Romney’s 162. During this period, the media attention was on Obama after his poor first debate performance and the Benghazi hearing. (The highest daily coverage was on November 6th, Election Day.)

Only one day in this 32 day time line of total media coverage did Romney eclipse the media coverage of Obama: October 10th—day of the Benghazi hearing. Romney had 138 data points compared to Obama’s 126.


Chapter Four: Conclusion

Chapter Four will provide a conclusion based on the FDA’s findings and analysis.

The FDA’s findings show conclusively that campaign coverage is a major issue in American presidential democracy. There is overwhelming evidence that the U.S. major media coverage was titled significantly in Obama’s favor, as illustrated by Obama having 54 percent of the total media coverage compared to Romney having 44.75 percent. In the last 32 days of the presidential election, Romney’s total daily media coverage eclipsed Obama’s total coverage only once. In addition, third-party presidential candidates were practically non-existent in the total media coverage, receiving a mere 1.26 percent combined total media coverage. Further, the three major U.S. broadcasters have an oligopoly over prime time news coverage with an 82.22 percent audience market share.

The FDA believes that these electoral fairness issues stem from a highly unregulated American federal electoral system in terms of campaign coverage. The American public and private media have free reign to determine their own election content during campaign periods. There is no requirement for broad and balanced election coverage nor are there media ownership concentration laws which prevent media oligopolies and monopolies except in the case of uncompetitive practices. This excessive media freedom potentially undermines the media’s fundamental election purpose of helping to fully inform the electorate of their electoral choices. Consequently, in the 2012 FDA Electoral Fairness Report, American federal media legislation received an audit score of 42.5 percent out of 100 percent. This failing score is confirmed by the findings of this report.

As most Americans are fully aware, unregulated freedom will likely lead to ill consequences as witnessed by the recent corruption and mismanagement of the highly unregulated U.S. financial sector. The same consequences apply to the media sector especially during the campaign periods. What would have been the outcome of the 2012 presidential election if Romney received the same total media coverage as Obama? How would the third-party presidential candidates faired if they had 20 percent of the total media coverage rather than just 1.25 percent?

The issue at stake is the legitimacy of American federal democracy. Under the current media arrangement, the U.S. national media has significant power to influence the American electorate and thereby the election outcome. The media’s influence is evidenced by the facts that the U.S. national media campaign coverage in terms of candidate ranking correlated exactly to the ranking of the U.S. popular voting results, and the percentage of candidates’ news coverage


correlated very similarly to the percentage of popular votes received by each candidate. Yet, democracy especially at election time is about the voice of the electorate. The only role of the media is to help fully inform the electorate about their electoral choices, and then let the electorate decide the election outcome. The media study presents significant evidence that this did not take place in the 2012 U.S. presidential election.

Chapter Five: Recommendations

Chapter Five will set out the FDA’s recommendations on how the fairness of America's presidential election coverage and media legislation may be improved.

Presently, the U.S. public and private media is unregulated in terms of the election content during election periods. As illustrated by the media’s coverage of the 2012 U.S. Presidential Election, this unregulated state is failing to create broad, balanced, and complete campaign coverage, and thereby an electorate inadequately and incompletely informed of their electoral choices. U.S. Supreme Court decisions like Citizens United and the 1St Amendment of the U.S. Constitution emphasize the high importance and protection of political free speech. The U.S. Judiciary’s extreme emphasize on political free speech has come at the cost of political fairness and equality: freedom alone guarantees that those individuals and organizations with more economic and political power will have significantly more influence on electoral discourse, and thereby influence the election outcome. Freedom balanced with fairness and equality guarantees that no individuals and organizations will dominate the electoral discourse, and that election outcomes will more accurately reflect the voice of the electorate.

To rectify this serious election deficiency through paradoxically over emphasis on political free speech, the FDA recommends that the U.S. Congress legislate a media code of conduct during the 60 day federal electioneering period and the 30 day electioneering period prior to the primaries.

The main points of the U.S. media code of conduct are

1. During the entire 60 day and 30 day federal electioneering periods, the U.S. major media in the television, radio, and newspaper sectors (including online), are required to present broad, balanced, and complete news coverage and related information of registered presidential candidates and parties.

Broad coverage means coverage of all registered candidates and parties subject to limitations.


Balanced coverage means equal weekly coverage of all registered candidates and parties in terms of number of stories and editorials by the newspaper sector, number of stories, news items, and interviews by the radio and television sectors subject to limitations on equal coverage.

Complete coverage means comprehensive coverage of all registered candidates and parties platforms and backgrounds.

2. Third-party presidential candidates are guaranteed 20 percent of the weekly coverage for major presidential candidates, subject to the third-party candidates having at least 0.5 percent popular support from the electorate. Third-party candidates who do not meet this popularity threshold have no guaranteed coverage.

3. The U.S. media code of conduct places no restrictions on the free speech of the media, except by requiring a framework of campaign coverage and complete coverage of all relevant and registered candidates and parties. The media’s opinions themselves are not regulated.

4. Federal Election Commission is empowered to monitor the media during the 60 day election periods, and enforce the code of conduct.

5. Media companies which fail to uphold the media code of conduct are subject to fines, suspension of campaign coverage, and loss of media license based on the severity of a violation(s) and history of violations.

This media code of conduct would eliminate the need for media ownership concentration laws, because all major media would be required to have broad, balanced, and complete campaign coverage.

The current issue of almost non-existent media coverage of third-party presidential candidates would be addressed through guaranteed 20 percent weekly coverage subject to having at least 0.5 percent popular support.

The current issue of the media’s significant influence on the electorate and electoral discourse would be addressed through the requirement of broad, balanced, and complete campaign coverage.

The media code of conduct’s impact on media companies’ profits would be mitigated by all major media being required to follow the code of conduct, and therefore no media would have an unfair content advantage. In addition, the code of conduct only applies to the 60 day and 30 day electioneering periods. In a four year election cycle, this requirement on the media is only 90 days out 1,460 days.

Even though U.S. federal candidates and political parties, through federal election law, have equal access to media and are charged equally by the media for advertisements, equal access to media and equal cost of advertisements do not necessarily translate into broad, balanced, and complete campaign coverage. Ability to advertisement through the media is subject to ability to pay. In addition, the media content itself is separate from political advertisements, and as the


U.S. Media Study shows, it can impact election discourse and ultimately the election outcome. In his article, “Election Campaign Broadcasting in Transitional Democracies: Problems, Principles and Guidelines,” P. Merloe came to the same conclusion arguing that biased broadcast news can influence the election outcome even if there is equal access to broadcast media. (Merloe, 1994).

Examples of Media Codes of Conduct during elections and studies on them

1. Malawi Media Code of Conduct (Malawi Code, 2008).

The Malawi Code includes a requirement for balanced and impartial election coverage.

2. Guyana Media Code of Conduct (Guyana Elections Commission, 2000).

The Guyana Code requires balanced and accurate election coverage.3. In 2010, Somaliland journalists adopted to Code of Conduct to guide their coverage of

Somaliland elections. The Code of Conduct is limited to journalist practices (Somalilandpress, 2010).

4. Tanzania Media Code of Conduct (Tanzania Code, 2010).

The media of conduct is limited to codes for journalists during elections. There is no overall code of conduct to guide the media.

5. Codes of Conduct for Elections (Goodwin-Gill, 1998).

This report examines role of media during elections and discusses the need for media codes of conduct during elections.

6. Pakistan Media Code of Conduct during elections (Hadi, Aziz, 2012).

The Pakistan code limit election news to the election period, negative news stories are restricted, personal stories on candidates disallowed, and media companies disallowed from accepting funds which create a conflict of interest.

7. Venezuela Media Code of Conduct (Foundation for Democratic Advancement, Electoral Fairness Audit Report on Venezuela, 2012).

Venezuelan Constitutional and Election law requires the candidates and parties to adhere to daily caps on mass media advertisements and the media itself is legally required to present balanced and complete campaign coverage.


References

African Elections Project. (2012). The Malawi Media Code of Conduct 2008. Retrieved from: http://www.africanelections.org/malawi/knowledgecenter/?knw=27

arbitron.com. (2012). Radio Today. Retrieved from:http://www.arbitron.com/downloads/Radio_Today_2012_execsum.pdf

Audit Bureau of Circulations. (2012). Average Circulation at the Top 25 U.S. Daily Newspapers. Retrieved from: http://accessabc.wordpress.com/2012/05/01/the-top-u-s-newspapers-for-march-2012/

Benton Foundation. (2012). How Many TV and Radio Stations Are There? Retrieved from: http://benton.org/node/65435

Federal Communications Commission. (2012). Low Power FM Broadcast Radio Stations. Retrieved from: http://www.fcc.gov/encyclopedia/low-power-fm-broadcast-radio-stations-lpfm

Federal Communications Commission. (2010). 2010 Review of Media Ownership Rules. Retrieved from: http://transition.fcc.gov/ownership/ Federal Communications Commission

Foundation for Democratic Advancement. (2012). 2012 FDA Electoral Fairness Audit Report on the U.S. Federal Electoral System. Retrieved from: http://democracychange.org/2012/10/2012-fda-electoral-fairness-report-on-the-united-states/

Foundation for Democratic Advancement. (2012). 2012 FDA Electoral Fairness Audit Report on the Venezuelan Federal Electoral System. Retrieved from: http://democracychange.org/2012/10/2012-fda-global-electoral-fairness-report-on-venezuela/

freepress.net. (2012). Media Ownership Chart. Retrieved from: http://www.freepress.net/ownership/chart


Goodwin-Gill, S, Guy. (1998). Codes of Conduct for Elections. Inter-Parliamentary Union. Retrieved from: http://www.ipu.org/PDF/publications/CODES_E.pdf

Guyana Elections Commission. (2000). Media Code of Conduct. Retrieved from: http://www.gecom.org.gy/media_code_of_conduct.html

Hadi, Aziz. (2012). ECP issues strict media code of conduct for elections. Retrieved from: http://www.mec.org.mw/Elections/CodesOfConduct/MalawiMedia/tabid/88/Default.aspx

Ledbetter, James. (2011). Looking Beyond Schiller’s Signoff from NPR. Retrieved from: http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/tag/npr/

Merloe, P. (1994). Election Campaign Broadcasting in Transitional Democracies: Problems, Principles and Guidelines. Article 19.

npr.org. (2010). 2010 NPR Annual Report. Retrieved from: http://www.npr.org/about/aboutnpr/annualreports/NPR_AnnualReport_2010.pdf

Pew Research Center. (2012). Audio: How Far Will Digital Go? Retrieved from:http://stateofthemedia.org/2012/audio-how-far-will-digital-go/?src=prc-section

Pew Research Center. (2012). In Changing News Landscape, Even Television is VulnerableTrends in News Consumption: 1991-2012. Retrieved from: http://www.people-press.org/2012/09/27/section-1-watching-reading-and-listening-to-the-news-3/

Pew Research Center. (2012). Internet Gains Most as Campaign News Source but Cable TV Still Leads. Retrieved from: http://www.journalism.org/commentary_backgrounder/social_media_doubles_remains_limited

Pew Research Center. (2012). State of News Media 2012. Retrieved from: http://stateofthemedia.org/2012/network-news-the-pace-of-change-accelerates/?src=prc-section

premiereradio.com. (2012). Corporate. Retrieved from: http://www.premiereradio.com/pages/corporate/about.html

Somililandpress. (2010). SOMALILAND: Journalists sign ‘media Code of Conduct’ before elections. Retrieved from: http://somalilandpress.com/somaliland-journalists-sign-media-code-of-conduct-before-elections-13455

TALKERS Magazine. (2012). The Top Talk Radio Audience. Retrieved from: http://www.talkers.com/top-talk-radio-audiences/


Talking Biz News. (2011). CNBC, Fox Business, Bloomberg Television and market share. Retrieved from: http://www.talkingbiznews.com/1/cnbc-fox-business-bloomberg-television-and-market-share/

Tanzania Media Code of Conduct. (2010). Retrieved from: http://www.tz.undp.org/ESP/docs/Legal_Documents/Media_code_of_conduct_for_election_reporting_Tzmainland2010.PDF

U.S. Supreme Court. Citizens United versus Federal Election Commission (No. 08-205). 2010. Retrieved from the Cornell University Law School website: http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/08-205.ZS.html

Wikipedia. (2012). CNN. Retrieved from:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CNN

Wikipedia. (2012). HLN. Retrieved from:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HLN_%28TV_channel%29

Wikipedia. (2012). List of Newspapers in the United States by Circulation. Retrieved from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_newspapers_in_the_United_States_by_circulation

Wikipedia. (2012). List of United States Radio Networks. Retrieved from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_radio_networks

Wikipedia. (2012). NPR. Retrieved from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NPR

Wikipedia. (2012). PBS. Retrieved from:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PBS

Wikipedia. (2012). Radio in the United States. Retrieved from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio_in_the_United_States

Wikipedia. (2012). Television News in the United States. Retrieved from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Television_news_in_the_United_States

Wikipedia. (2012). United States Presidential Election, 2012. Retrieved from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_2012


Research Methodology

Methodology of the U.S. Media Study:

The methodology is comprised of two major components: research and data collection. In previous media studies, the FDA consulted Dr. Mark Wolfe, Communications Specialist from Mount Royal University, Alberta, Canada on the methodology of its media study.

Research:

The FDA Study focuses on the U.S. major media in the newspaper, radio, and television sectors (including online). This approach targets large sectors of the U.S. media market in order to form a reasonable picture of what occurred in the media during the 2012 American Presidential Election. The FDA researched media ownership in each sector, and selected media companies with significant national circulation to be part of the study. In the newspaper sector, the FDA researchers identified seven newspapers with high circulation and in all major regions of the United States. In the television sector, the FDA researchers identified seven major news networks based on viewership. However, the radio sector proved difficult due to the large number of ownership groups and talk radio shows. The FDA researchers chose five radio programs based on viewership, gender to talk show host, and public versus private company. The radio companies in the study cover corporations with 25.15% of the total American news/talk radio/information audience. There are 14,274 full powered American radio stations and 170 million American radio audience.

The FDA media study is limited to seven national newspaper companies, five national radio programs, and seven television news networks. Therefore, especially in the case of the radio sector, the media results in terms of determining the percentage of election coverage per party are limited to 25.15 percent of the radio market. The FDA accepts this limitation, and it will increase the number of corporations/programs/shows in future American media studies especially in the radio sector.

Data Collection:

A twelve-person team, comprised of FDA members and guided by non-partisanship and objectivity, conducted the Study’s data collection. Each member of the team is responsible for tracking a particular news production whether a newspaper, radio show, or television news


program. In addition, members record data into spreadsheets, and recheck data with media sources in case of discrepancy with overall data entries. Completed data from each member is then compiled into a master spreadsheet and used for analysis.

In the all three media sectors, the FDA data collectors focus on the bias of news stories. The FDA data collectors determine whether or not a particular story has a positive, neutral, or negative bias to one or more presidential candidate. The basic criterion for determining bias is whether or not the story encourages the electorate to vote for or against a presidential candidate or his or her party. There may be more than one bias in a story, such as a story which praises the economic policies of one candidate while attack the economic policies of another candidate.

Stories on Party and/or Candidates: Stories directly on the party or leaders and candidates who comprise the party. One mark per story; may be a mark for more than one party.

Biases in Stories: Biases in stories encourage the electorate to vote for or against a candidate or party; stories may be neutral; only one bias per story. Please input numeric for which bias is present. Each story will have a bias under one of either positive, neutral, or negative. Also, ensure that biases apply only to the dominant party or candidate in the story, unless it is split equally two or more ways.

Note: Numeric must be input for the DOMINANT bias towards party/candidate in the story. Each story MAY have more than one bias (there must be an equal split between biases for this to occur).

POSITIVE NEUTRAL NEGATIVERepublican Party (Mitt Romney)

5 1 4Democratic Party (Barack Obama)

4 3 1Libertarian Party (Gary Johnson)

0 Green Party (Jill Stein)

0 Constitution Party (Virgil Goode)

0 All Other Parties/Candidates

0

TOTALS 9 4 0 5


The table shows a data capture sheet. The total biases automatically add up to the total stories directly on presidential candidates and parties.

Document Biases: Please document the reason for bias. A bias must encourage the electorate to vote for a party (or candidate) or against a party (or candidate).

Republican Party (Mitt Romney)

Neg: College Football might lose Ohio for Mitt Romney; Pos: GOP holds 'Super Saturday' turnout effort; Neg: Obama bashes Romney with pop culture; Neg: Obama-Romney's latest issue: Bid Bird; Neg: New Obama ad on Romney: 'Dishonest'

Democratic Party (Barack Obama)

Pos: Obama brings in $181 million in September; Pos: Obama touts 7.8% jobless rate; Pos: Obama campaign raised $181M in September; Neg: Economists debunk Jack Welch's jobs tweet

Libertarian Party (Gary Johnson)

Green Party (Jill Stein)

Constitution Party (Virgil Goode)

All Other Parties/Candidates

The table is an example of the capture of reasons for news biases by FDA data collectors.

The FDA chose to track positive, neutral, and negative news stories, in order to measure bias in media content. The FDA reduced subjectivity in this measurement by having non-partisan, objective, and educated data collectors from multi-disciplinary backgrounds. In addition, data


collectors are required to record the reason for each recorded bias. The FDA created support mechanisms for all data collectors in order to address issues as they occurred, such as uncertainty regarding the particular bias of a story.

Limitations:

The FDA media study is limited to the last 32 days of campaign period. Therefore, it is possible the study results may not correlate to entire 60 day campaign period. However, this fact does not cancel out the evidence of bias coverage in the 32 days of the campaign period. Although the American presidential election was characterized by a two candidate race, the FDA does not accept this as justification for the biased coverage, because the significant biased coverage in favor of Obama over Romney, and the almost non-existent coverage of third-party candidates.

The FDA acknowledges the subjectivity of determining biases. However, every election story has a bias whether positive, neutral, or negative. Obviously, how an individual reads and/or interprets the meaning of a story will impact the story’s bias. The FDA has no control over how an individual reads or interprets stories. The FDA has control over determining objectively the underlining bias of a story by showing reasons why, for example, a story encourages the electorate to vote for a candidate over another. These reasons in most cases are factual.

The Study is also limited by covering only nineteen news sources. Obviously, the reliability of the Study results would be improved by tracking more news sources. However, the FDA did track major news sources in the three media sectors:

47.66 percent of the newspaper market for the largest 100 U.S. newspapers (based on circulation)

25.15 percent of the radio news/talk/information market

97.72 percent of the National News Networks, Cable News, and Public News market.

In future studies and to produce more reliable results, the FDA should cover more of the radio news/talk/information market and newspaper market, so that the data in all three sectors are over 50 percent of the respective markets.


Appendix

2012 FDA Electoral Fairness Audit Results for the U.S. Federal Electoral System, Media Political Content

This chapter focuses on American’s media laws and the FDA's audit of them. Based on the concepts of egalitarianism and political liberalism, the FDA audit team examined media laws according to the standard of broad and balanced political coverage before, during and after a campaign period (see Appendix for further explanation). The Table 1 below shows the FDA’s audit variables, their corresponding audit weights, and results:

Table 1

Media Election Coverage Section

Variables

% Subsection Audit Weight

Numerical Subsection Audit

Weight

Audit Results

% Results

Broad and Balanced Election Coverage

30% 3.0 0.0 0.0%

Media Ownership 15% 1.5 0.0 0.0%Survey/Polls 5% 0.5 0.25 50%Freedom of Media 40% 4.0 4.0 100%Press Code of Practice/Conduct

10% 1.0 0.0 0.0%

Variables from Other Sections

n/a n/a n/a n/a

Total 100% 10 4.25 42.50%

Broad and Balanced Political Coverage

Audit Questions

1) During the campaign period, is the media (private and public) required legally to publish/broadcast broad/balanced coverage of registered candidates and parties?

2) Outside of the campaign period, is the media legally required to publish/broadcast pluralistic/balanced coverage of registered parties?

3) If the media is legally required to publish/disseminate broad and balanced political coverage, are there reasonable monitoring and penalty mechanisms in place?


Legislative Research

Any cost incurred in a news story, commentary, or editorial by media (broadcaster, press, web site, magazine, or other periodical) is not a political contribution if the media organization is not owned or controlled by any political party, political committee, or candidates (Code of Federal Regulations, Section 100.29).

There is no legal requirement for equal opportunity for a newscast, interview, documentary (if the appearance of a candidate is incidental to the documentary's subject matter), or news event, including debates, political conventions and related incidental activities. Media has an obligation to present news in the “public interest” and “afford reasonable opportunity for the discussion of conflicting views of issues of public importance” (Code of Federal Regulations, Section 100.29).

Communications by state or local candidates that do support or oppose a candidate are not considered to be electioneering communications (Code of Federal Regulations, Section 100.29).

Electioneering communications are limited to paid programming and only apply to the 60 day period prior to a general election or the 30 day period before a primary election for federal office, including elections in which a candidate is unopposed (Code of Federal Regulations, Section 100.29).

Noncommercial educational broadcasting stations may support or oppose any candidate for office. This broadcast restriction does not apply to editorializing in the public interest (U.S. Code, Title 47: Telegraphs, Telephones, and Telegraphs, Section 399).

Media entities' online news content is not considered contributions or expenditures. The media exemptions apply to all bloggers and others who communicate on the internet unless the facility including website is owned or controlled by a political party, candidate or a political committee (Internet Communications and Activity, 2012).

Any corporation or labor organization may donate funds to support a debate conducted by a nonprofit organization. The debate must not support or oppose any candidate or party, be sponsored by a broadcaster, newspaper, magazine, other circulation periodical publication, and include at least two candidates who meet face to face, does not promote one candidate over the other. In a primary election, organizations staging a debate may restrict candidates to those seeking nomination of one party, and in a general election may not use nomination of a particular party as the sole criterion for debate participants. Staging organizations must use preestablished objective criteria to determine participants (Code of Federal Regulations, Section 114.4(f)).

Audit Findings

The FDA auditors found no legislation requiring the media to provide broad and balanced political coverage during the 60 day campaign period or outside of the campaign period.

Media Ownership Concentration Laws


Audit Questions

1) If there are media concentration laws, are they effective in causing a plurality of political discourse?

2) If there is no legal requirement of media plurality, impartiality, and balanced content or media ownership concentration laws, are there any other laws that are effective in causing a plurality of political discourse before and during an election period?


There are no U.S. media ownership concentration laws. The U.S. media concentration is regulated by U.S. general antitrust laws. U.S. antitrust laws are rooted in the Sherman Antitrust Act (1890), which provides remedy against monopoly or attempt to monopolize. The Act does not necessarily ban monopolies; it bans monopolies, which stem from anti-competitive conduct such as price fixing, bid rigging, or agreed market allocation by competitors (Statutory Provisions and Guidelines of the Antitrust Division, 2012; Sherman Antitrust Act, 2012).

Audit Findings

The FDA auditors found no legislation limiting media ownership concentration. The U.S. Antitrust Laws, which provide a remedy against monopoly and/or attempts to monopolize, have no impact on media ownership concentration unless the concentration derives from anti-competitive conduct.

Surveys/Polls Audit Question

1) Are there reasonable public disclosure requirements on surveys and polls in terms of their methodology, data, and funder?


The FDA researches could find no legislation on the public discloser of the methodology and data sources of survey and polls. However, associations such as the National Council on Public Polls (NCPP) and American Association for Public Opinion Research (AAPOR) advocate public disclosure requirements for their members.

The NCPP is an association of polling organizations that sets professional standards for public opinion pollsters. The association recommends three levels of disclosure. The first level calls for one of its member associations to publicly release information, such as sponsorship, sampling method used, population and size of sample, and survey methods. The second level of disclosure pertains to specific written requests regarding any survey findings publicly released by NCCP members. These requests can include the exact wording of an introduction, details of any


incentives given to survey participants, and any description of weighting procedures to generalize data. Finally, the third level of disclosure encourages its members to release raw datasets, and post complete survey questions used in their surveys (Principles of Disclosure, 2012).

The Standards of Disclosure in the AAPOR’s Code of Professional Ethics & Practices states that the final reports of members will include the sponsors, conductors, and all original funding resources. The Code also requires the disclosure of exact wording of questions, descriptions of sample sizes and design, as well as the method and dates of data collection. In the event further information is requested concerning any given report, the members will have 30 days to provide greater details concerning sample design, summaries of dispositions, any relevant stimuli, and the procedures undertaken to verify data (Code of Professional Ethics & Practices, 2010).

Electioneering communications are limited to paid programming and only apply to the 60 period prior to a general election or the 30 day period before a primary election for federal office, including elections in which a candidate is unopposed (Code of Federal Regulations, Section 100.29).

Broadcast political advertisements must display photographic or similar images of the candidate, a statement identifying the candidate, the candidate's approval for the advertisement, and the candidate's authorized committee, which paid for the broadcast (The Public and Broadcasting: How to Get the Most Service from Your Local Stations, 2008; U.S. Code, Title 47, Section 315).

Radio political advertisements must include a personal statement from the candidate, which identifies the candidate as well as the office the candidate is seeking, and indicates that the candidate approved of the broadcast (The Public and Broadcasting: How to Get the Most Service from Your Local Stations, 2008; U.S. Code, Title 47, Section 315).

Paid political statements made through any broadcasting station, newspaper, magazine, outdoor advertising facility, mailing, or any other type of general public political advertising must clearly declare the authorized political committee or other persons who paid for communication as well as who authorized the other persons, such as a candidate or authorized political committee. If transmitted by television, the statements must include either an unobscured, full-screen views of the candidate or agent of the candidate making the statement, a voice-over, or both, and shall also appear in a readable manner with a reasonable degree of color contrast between the background and the printed statement for a period of at least 4 seconds. If the political statement is not authorized by a candidate or political committee, the communication must state the name and permanent street address, telephone number or World Wide Web address, of the person who paid for the message and must also state that it is not authorized by a candidate or political committee (Code Federal Regulations, Section 441d).

Audit Findings

The FDA auditors found no legislation which required disclosure standards for survey and polling organizations. Although there are private organizations which establish survey and poll disclosure standards, these standards are voluntary and contingent upon membership in the


organizations. The score of 0.25 reflects the fact that disclosure standards exist and that some polling and survey organizations likely adhere to them.

Freedom of the Media

Audit Question

1) Does constitutional or legislative law establish freedom of the media (including journalists)?


Any corporation or labor organization may donate funds to support a debate conducted by a nonprofit organization. The debate must not support or oppose any candidate or party, must be sponsored by a broadcaster, newspaper, magazine, and/or other circulation periodical publication, must include at least two candidates who meet face to face, and does not promote one candidate over the other. In a primary election, organization staging debate may restrict candidates to those seeking nomination of one party, and in a general election may not use nomination of particular party as the sole basis for criterion for debate participants. Staging organization must use pre-established objective criteria to determine participants (Code of Federal Regulations, Article 114.4(f)).

Broadcast stations must provide reasonable access to federal candidates, during all stations' normal broadcast schedule, including television prime time and radio drive time. The only exception to equal access is during bona fide news programming (The Public and Broadcasting: How to Get the Most Service from Your Local Stations, 2008; U.S. Code, Title 47, Article 315).

Broadcast stations must provide equal airtime and equal opportunities to all registered federal candidates. The only exception to equal airtime and equal opportunities is during bona fide news programming, such as the appearance of a candidate on bona fide newscast, interview, documentary, or on the spot news event (including debates, political conventions and related incidental activities) (The Public and Broadcasting: How to Get the Most Service from Your Local Stations, 2008; U.S. Code, Title 47, Article 315).

Any cost incurred in a news story, commentary, or editorial by media (broadcaster, press, web site, magazine, or other periodical) is not a political contribution if the media organization is not owned or controlled by any political party, political committee, or candidates (Code of Federal Regulations, Article 100.29).

There is no legal requirement for equal opportunity for a newscast, interview, documentary (if the appearance of a candidate is incidental to the documentary's subject matter), or news event including debates, political conventions and related incidental activities. Media has an obligation to present news in the “public interest” and “afford reasonable opportunity for the discussion of conflicting views of issues of public importance” (Code of Federal Regulations, Article 100.29).


Noncommercial educational broadcasting stations may support or oppose any candidate for office. This broadcast restriction does not apply to editorializing in the public interest (U.S. Code, Title 47: Telegraphs, Telephones, and Telegraphs, Section 399).

Media entities' online news content is not considered contributions or expenditures. The media exemptions apply to all bloggers and others who communicate on the internet unless the facility including website is owned or controlled by a political party, candidate or a political committee (Internet Communications and Activity, 2012).

The U.S. Congress has legislative power (U.S. Constitution, Article I, Section 1), and the U.S. Congress must not make laws which prohibit or abridge freedom of speech, freedom of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble (U.S. Constitution, First Amendment, 2012).

Citizens of the United States cannot be denied life, liberty, or property without due process of law, and equal protection of the laws (U.S. Constitution, Fourteenth Amendment, Section 1).All persons born or naturalized in the United States are citizens of the United States (U.S. Constitution, Fourteenth Amendment, Section 1, 2012).

Audit Findings

The FDA auditors found nothing in the U.S. Constitution and legislation that would unreasonably limit the freedom of the press.

Press Code of Practice/Conduct

Audit Questions

1) Does a Code of Practice/Conduct that supports impartial, balanced electoral coverage guide the press?

2) If a Code of Practice/Conduct that supports impartial, balanced electoral coverage guides the press, is the Code of Practice/Conduct enforceable?


The American Press Association has a code of conduct for journalists and photographers. The APA Code of Conduct does not cover elections, nor does it include impartial and balanced election coverage. Members of the APA are expected to abide by the APA Code of Conduct (Code of Conduct Journalists and Photographers, 2012).

The American Society of Newspaper Editors has a statement of principles. The Statement of Principles includes impartiality in terms of distinguishing between fact and opinion. There are principles that pertain to elections or require balanced coverage. Each newspaper within the ASNE has its own code of ethics. The FDA counted 34 different codes of ethics. The New York Times is committed to be as impartial as possible “with fear or favor”, but there is no


requirement that the newspaper have balanced election coverage. The FDA found no ethical requirement on any of the newspapers in the ASNE to have broad and balance electoral coverage (Code of Conduct, 2012).

The U.S. Congress has legislative power (U.S. Constitution, Article I, Section 1), and the U.S. Congress must not make law which prohibits or abridges freedom of speech, or the press, or right of the people peaceably to assemble (U.S. Constitution, First Amendment, 2012).

The freedom of the media cannot be regulated within extremes. A legislated press code of conduct would be inconsistent with the U.S. Constitution, First Amendment (Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, 2010).

The FDA researchers found no legislated press code of conduct.

Audit Findings

The FDA auditors found no legislation requiring a press Code of Practice/Conduct for impartial, balanced electoral coverage. Although private press organizations have a Code of Conduct/Ethics, adherence is voluntary. The FDA researchers examined 34 Code of Conducts/Ethics by members of the American Society of Newspaper Editors and found no instance of Code of Conduct/Ethics requiring impartial and/or balanced electoral coverage.

Total score for the electoral fairness on media election coverage: 42.5 percent out of 100 percent.


FDA Media Study Team & Associates

FDA Researchers

Mr. Steve Finley, Bachelor of Science in Electrical Engineering, Purdue University, Master of Business Administration, Indiana University, and Juris Doctor, Valparaiso University.

Mr. Stephen Garvey, Bachelor of Arts in Political Science, University of British Columbia and Master of Philosophy in Environment and Development, University of Cambridge.

Ms. Arden Matheson, Bachelor of Arts, University of Alberta, Bachelor of Library Science, University of Alberta, and Master of Library Science, University of British Columbia.

FDA Data Collection Team

Ms. Kelsey Angeley, Bachelor in Arts in Political Science, McGill University.

Mr. Michael Fabris, Bachelor of Accounting, Brock University.



Ms. Jessica Lindal, Marketing Degree, SAIT Polytechnic, School of Business.

Mr. Dale Monette, Bachelor of Commerce, University of Saskatchewan and Master of Accounting (in progress), University of Saskatchewan.

Mr. James Porter, Bachelors of Commerce in Accounting, University of Calgary andBachelors of Arts in Philosophy, University of Calgary

Ms. Christie Rehmann, Bachelor of Social Work, University of Calgary and Masters of Public Administration, University of Regina.

Ms. Leanna Seetahal, L.L.B., University of the West Indies.

Mr. Michael Stephens, Degree in Business intelligence, SAIT Polytechnic.

Ms. Mansharn Toor, Bachelor of Arts in Political Science and a minor in Sociology, University of Calgary.


Ms. Shumin Zeng, Bachelor of Computer Science, Southwestern University of Finance.

Data Tabulation


Statistical Data Analysis and Graphic Design


Report Writer


Report Reviewers



Arden Matheson, Bachelor of Arts, University of Alberta, Bachelor of Library Science, University of Alberta, and Master of Library Science, University of British Columbia.


Mrs. Lindsay Tetlock, Bachelor of Arts in International Relations, University of Calgary and Master of Arts in Historical Studies, University of Calgary.


Date post:	09-May-2015
Category:	News & Politics
Upload:	foundation-for-democratic-advancement
View:	3,040 times
Download:	9 times

United States--2012 FDA Presidential Election Media Study

News & Politics