Presidential News Stories and Numbers

Every so often I read a post about the Presidential candidates and media coverage. The particular piece may focus on how much media coverage there is this election cycle or the piece may focus on how much more media coverage a particular candidate or two is getting this week because of a specific story or endorsement, but occasionally the piece discusses the potential impact of this unbalanced media coverage.

However, most stories and most online posts I read about the Democratic Nomination for President focus on how the primary is a two-person race, even though there are 6 serious candidates. Do such stories merely reinforce the meme that voters only have two choices or perhaps do these stories create, propagate, and drive this meme?

Using a Google News search, here are the top six Democratic candidates. This isn't an exact science. The top three candidates are ordered based upon favorite status for the overall election, the lower three candidates are ordered based upon the order I believe they will finish in Iowa.
Google News searches:

Hillary Clinton:......56,620
Barack Obama:......37,128
John Edwards:.......33,296
Joe Biden:...............6,752
Bill Richardson:......8,152
Chris Dodd:.............6,038

Senator Clinton:..............23,118
Senator Obama:..............19,037
Senator Edwards:............12,079
Senator Biden:.................2,960
Governor Richardson:......2,940
Senator Dodd:.................3,028

Clinton:...........91,375** (other "Clinton")
Obama:...........42,433
Edwards:.........57,611** (other "Edwards")
Biden:..............8,037
Richardson:.....28,156** (other "Richardson")
Dodd:...............10,801

Democrat Hillary Clinton:.....40,918
Democrat Barack Obama:.....33,906
Democrat John Edwards:......23,186
Democrat Joe Biden:.............6,289
Democrat Bill Richardson:....5,815
Democrat Chris Dodd:...........5,876


From the lists, it is clear that there are more media stories that mention Hillary Clinton than anyone. After her, comes Barack Obama, John Edwards, etc... However, taking the "Democrat X,Y" list, Hillary has about 20% more stories than Barack Obama, and nearly 80% more stories than John Edwards. The other candidates are nowhere to be seen.

What these numbers fail to tell us though is how significant each article was for each candidate. My anecdotal experiences tell me that most stories focus on Hillary and Obama, while making occasional mention of other candidates, and any story that focuses on John Edwards will mention Hillary and Obama as his rivals and how he plans to fight/beat them.

So, is this media coverage fair?

I think if the current difference in media attention was a recent phenomenon of the past month or two, then this would be fine. BUT, that is simply not the case. Since the Spring the media has focused on Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. I fear that the media's desire to have a story line has negatively impacted the ability of candidates to compete on a level plain. What chance does a Chris Dodd, who takes many courageous positions, have against a media titan like Hillary Clinton? When people only see/hear one or two candidates on TV or in the paper, what chance do other candidates who are never mentioned have?

I fear the media has propagated a self-fulfilling prophecy regarding the Democratic race. This self-fulfilling prophecy has only been further advanced by a number of national unions who have a clear favorite (John Edwards), but have hesitated to make any national endorsement for fear of not backing the candidate who will win the primary:
"Neither Nevada's SEIU or Culinary Local 226 have made an endorsement yet."

The SEIU and the Culinary Local are two of the largest (if not the outright largest) unions in Nevada. If they strongly endorse a candidate, that candidate will potentially receive thousands of supporters in Nevada. In addition, the national SEIU was expected to endorse Edwards, which would have been a big boost, but did not. The hesitancy on the part of these unions is a direct result of the narrative that the Democratic primary is a race between two people. Why risk upsetting the ultimate victor by endorsing an underdog? Some unions will be willing to make that endorsement, but many will not. And, as a result, the candidate who might have won--were he to have union to support-- is now likely to lose, because he has no union support.
But back to the main point,

It is dangerous to allow the media to dictate the terms of our democracy and our elections. People respond to their friends and their family. If you have a favorite in an election, do your candidate a favor and be willing to mention his/her name to your friends/family every so often. Your family may not go out and vote for your candidate, but they will be aware of his/her existence and the next time your candidate's name is mentioned somewhere, or not mentioned, perhaps your friends and family will remember the good things you said. Democracy requires participation, not simply trust in and consumption of the news media and whatever narrative they are attempting to sell.

-Zen Blade