Media coverage of Bernie Sanders: Difference between revisions

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
→‎Academic books and studies: Patterson: Sanders received 2/3 of coverage Clinton received
Empty meaningless quote that has been removed before. It is a stat designed to mislead the reader in a vaccumUndid revision 942392142 by Ghostofnemo (talk)
Line 19: Line 19:
Jonathan Stray, a computational journalism researcher at the Columbia Journalism School, wrote for [[Nieman Lab]] in January 2016 that, "at least online", Sanders got coverage proportionate to his standing in polls.<ref>{{Cite web|author=Jonathan Stray|url=https://www.niemanlab.org/2016/01/how-much-influence-does-the-media-really-have-over-elections-digging-into-the-data/|title=How much influence does the media really have over elections? Digging into the data|website=Nieman Lab|access-date=December 9, 2019}}</ref>
Jonathan Stray, a computational journalism researcher at the Columbia Journalism School, wrote for [[Nieman Lab]] in January 2016 that, "at least online", Sanders got coverage proportionate to his standing in polls.<ref>{{Cite web|author=Jonathan Stray|url=https://www.niemanlab.org/2016/01/how-much-influence-does-the-media-really-have-over-elections-digging-into-the-data/|title=How much influence does the media really have over elections? Digging into the data|website=Nieman Lab|access-date=December 9, 2019}}</ref>


Thomas Patterson of the Harvard Kennedy School [[Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics and Public Policy|Shorenstein Center]] on Media, Politics, and Public Policy wrote a report in June 2016 analyzing the media coverage of candidates in the 2016 presidential primaries.<ref>{{cite news|work=Frontline|publisher=[[PBS]]|date=|title=Study: Election Coverage Skewed By "Journalistic Bias"|url=https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/study-election-coverage-skewed-by-journalistic-bias/|author=Sarah Childress}}</ref> Patterson said that Sanders did better than most "candidates in recent decades who entered the campaign with no money, no organization, and no national following".<ref name="Patterson1" /> According to data compiled by [[Media Tenor]], "[o]ver the course of 2015, the Democratic race got less than half as much news exposure as the Republican race."<ref name="Patterson1" /> Patterson said that this data showed the Sanders campaign was "largely ignored in the early months", but that once he did begin to get coverage in 2015, it was "overwhelmingly positive in tone", but that this positive media exposure did not happen "at a rate close to what he needed to compensate for the early part of the year."<ref name="Patterson1">{{citation|author=Thomas E. Patterson|title=Pre-Primary News Coverage of the 2016 Presidential Race: Trump's Rise, Sanders' Emergence, Clinton's Struggle|url=https://shorensteincenter.org/pre-primary-news-coverage-2016-trump-clinton-sanders/|access-date=December 1, 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191127095707/https://shorensteincenter.org/pre-primary-news-coverage-2016-trump-clinton-sanders/|archive-date=November 27, 2019|url-status=live}}</ref><ref name="n-decosta-klipa 20162">{{cite web|url=https://www.boston.com/news/politics/2016/06/14/harvard-study-confirms-refutes-bernie-sanderss-complaints-media|title=This Harvard study both confirms and refutes Bernie Sanders's complaints about the media|author=Nikolas Decosta-Klipa|date=June 14, 2016|website=Boston Globe|access-date=December 6, 2019}}</ref> Patterson also found that coverage of Sanders was sparse during the middle period of the primary (March 15-May 3). In relation to media coverage of Hillary Clinton, he noted, "Over the course of the primary season, Sanders received only two-thirds of the coverage afforded Clinton."<ref name="Patterson2" />
Thomas Patterson of the Harvard Kennedy School [[Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics and Public Policy|Shorenstein Center]] on Media, Politics, and Public Policy wrote a report in June 2016 analyzing the media coverage of candidates in the 2016 presidential primaries.<ref>{{cite news|work=Frontline|publisher=[[PBS]]|date=|title=Study: Election Coverage Skewed By "Journalistic Bias"|url=https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/study-election-coverage-skewed-by-journalistic-bias/|author=Sarah Childress}}</ref> Patterson said that Sanders did better than most "candidates in recent decades who entered the campaign with no money, no organization, and no national following".<ref name="Patterson1" /> According to data compiled by [[Media Tenor]], "[o]ver the course of 2015, the Democratic race got less than half as much news exposure as the Republican race."<ref name="Patterson1" /> Patterson said that this data showed the Sanders campaign was "largely ignored in the early months", but that once he did begin to get coverage in 2015, it was "overwhelmingly positive in tone", but that this positive media exposure did not happen "at a rate close to what he needed to compensate for the early part of the year."<ref name="Patterson1">{{citation|author=Thomas E. Patterson|title=Pre-Primary News Coverage of the 2016 Presidential Race: Trump's Rise, Sanders' Emergence, Clinton's Struggle|url=https://shorensteincenter.org/pre-primary-news-coverage-2016-trump-clinton-sanders/|access-date=December 1, 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191127095707/https://shorensteincenter.org/pre-primary-news-coverage-2016-trump-clinton-sanders/|archive-date=November 27, 2019|url-status=live}}</ref><ref name="n-decosta-klipa 20162">{{cite web|url=https://www.boston.com/news/politics/2016/06/14/harvard-study-confirms-refutes-bernie-sanderss-complaints-media|title=This Harvard study both confirms and refutes Bernie Sanders's complaints about the media|author=Nikolas Decosta-Klipa|date=June 14, 2016|website=Boston Globe|access-date=December 6, 2019}}</ref> Patterson also found that coverage of Sanders was sparse during the middle period of the primary (March 15-May 3).<ref name="Patterson2" />


A 2018 book co-written by three political scientists said that the amount of news coverage Sanders received exceeded his share in the national polls in 2015. Throughout the campaign as a whole, their analysis showed that his "media coverage and polling numbers were strongly correlated."<ref name="Sides">{{cite book|url=https://press.princeton.edu/books/hardcover/9780691174198/identity-crisis|title=Identity Crisis|author1=John Sides|author2=Michael Tesler|author3=Lynn Vavreck|publisher=Princeton University Press|year=2018|isbn=978-0-691-17419-8|location=|pages=8, 99, 104-107|language=en|access-date=December 8, 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191114214823/https://press.princeton.edu/books/hardcover/9780691174198/identity-crisis|archive-date=November 14, 2019|url-status=live}}</ref>
A 2018 book co-written by three political scientists said that the amount of news coverage Sanders received exceeded his share in the national polls in 2015. Throughout the campaign as a whole, their analysis showed that his "media coverage and polling numbers were strongly correlated."<ref name="Sides">{{cite book|url=https://press.princeton.edu/books/hardcover/9780691174198/identity-crisis|title=Identity Crisis|author1=John Sides|author2=Michael Tesler|author3=Lynn Vavreck|publisher=Princeton University Press|year=2018|isbn=978-0-691-17419-8|location=|pages=8, 99, 104-107|language=en|access-date=December 8, 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191114214823/https://press.princeton.edu/books/hardcover/9780691174198/identity-crisis|archive-date=November 14, 2019|url-status=live}}</ref>

Revision as of 12:00, 24 February 2020

Bernie Sanders in November 2019

The media coverage of Bernie Sanders became a subject of controversy during his 2016 presidential run. His campaign, some independent observers, and some media sources have argued that the mainstream media in the United States is biased against Bernie Sanders. Others say that coverage is unbiased or biased in his favor. The allegations of bias primarily concern both his 2016 and 2020 presidential campaigns.

A study of the 2016 election found that the amount of media coverage of Sanders during 2015 exceeded his standing in the polls, and was strongly correlated with his polling performance over the course of the whole campaign.[1] While Sanders received less media coverage than Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton, research shows that the tone of media coverage of Sanders was more favorable than that of any other candidate.[1][2] During the 2016 election, the media provided substantially more coverage of the Republican primary than the Democratic primary, and Republican candidate Donald Trump dominated media coverage.[3]

During the 2020 Democratic primary, Sanders, his campaign and his supporters criticized the media as biased again. Sanders suggested that the Washington Post gave him unfair coverage because Sanders had encouraged taxing Post-owner Jeff Bezos's main company, Amazon, more heavily.[4] The executive editor of the Post rejected Sanders's suggestion, describing it as conspiratorial.[5]

Background

Writing in 2005, Sanders identified corporate media coverage of political issues as a subject on which he felt he needed to take a position.[6]

Sanders lost the 2016 Democratic Party presidential primary to Hillary Clinton. After the election, he released a campaign book which devoted a chapter to media issues. He wrote that while national media did not cover his visits to poverty-stricken areas of the country, local media did. He also raised issue with the consequences of corporations like General Electric, Comcast, and Disney owning media conglomerates for media coverage of issues like taxation and trans-national trade agreements.[7]

Academic books and studies

Jonathan Stray, a computational journalism researcher at the Columbia Journalism School, wrote for Nieman Lab in January 2016 that, "at least online", Sanders got coverage proportionate to his standing in polls.[8]

Thomas Patterson of the Harvard Kennedy School Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics, and Public Policy wrote a report in June 2016 analyzing the media coverage of candidates in the 2016 presidential primaries.[9] Patterson said that Sanders did better than most "candidates in recent decades who entered the campaign with no money, no organization, and no national following".[2] According to data compiled by Media Tenor, "[o]ver the course of 2015, the Democratic race got less than half as much news exposure as the Republican race."[2] Patterson said that this data showed the Sanders campaign was "largely ignored in the early months", but that once he did begin to get coverage in 2015, it was "overwhelmingly positive in tone", but that this positive media exposure did not happen "at a rate close to what he needed to compensate for the early part of the year."[2][10] Patterson also found that coverage of Sanders was sparse during the middle period of the primary (March 15-May 3).[3]

A 2018 book co-written by three political scientists said that the amount of news coverage Sanders received exceeded his share in the national polls in 2015. Throughout the campaign as a whole, their analysis showed that his "media coverage and polling numbers were strongly correlated."[1]

In her 2018 book, Rachel Bitecofer wrote that the Democratic primary was effectively over in terms of delegate count by mid-March 2016, but that the media promoted the narrative that the contest between Sanders and Clinton was "heating up" at that time.[11] Bitecofer found that Trump received more media coverage than Ted Cruz, John Kasich, Hillary Clinton, and Bernie Sanders combined during a time when those were the only primary candidates left in the race.[11]

A 2019 study by Northeastern University's School of Journalism found that Sanders initially received the most positive coverage of any major candidate in the 2020 primary and later the third and then fourth most favorable of eight candidates.[12][13]

2016 primary campaign

See also: 2016 Democratic Party presidential primaries and Bernie Sanders 2016 presidential campaign
Sanders at a town meeting in Phoenix, Arizona, July 2015

In August 2015, Elizabeth Jensen of NPR responded to an influx of emails regarding a "Morning Edition" segment. Jensen said that she does not "find that NPR has been slighting his campaign", adding that, "In the last two days alone, NPR has covered the Democrats' climate change stances and reactions to the Republican debate and Sanders has been well in the mix."[14]

In the following month, Margaret Sullivan, public editor of the New York Times, wrote that she had received many complaints from readers about purported bias against Sanders. She responded that the Times had given roughly the same amount of articles dedicated to Sanders as they did to similarly-polling Republican candidates (barring Donald Trump), while conceding that some of the articles written were "fluff" and "regrettably dismissive".[15] Later in the month, The Washington Post wrote, "Sanders has not faced the kind of media scrutiny, let alone attacks from opponents, that leading candidates eventually experience."[16] John Sides also wrote in the same outlet that the volume of media coverage of Sanders had been consistent with his polling and that the press he had been getting was more favorable than Clinton's.[17]

In January 2016, Claire Malone from FiveThirtyEight said that Sanders was not the subject of a "media blackout," as he had just reached a 30 percent share of coverage.[18] The same month,The Guardian reported that Sanders aides had accused David Brock, a Clinton ally, of mudslinging,[19] after Brock spoke to the press about one of Sanders' campaign ads, suggesting that, "it seems black lives don't matter to Bernie Sanders."[20] Despite this characterization, the ad "elicited very positive responses when it was shown to a representative sample of Americans."[1]: 110  Asked by Jay Newton-Small of Time magazine in February if he was "fighting an asymmetrical war against [Sanders]," Brock commented that "we do opposition research, but we haven't leveled any false accusations against Senator Sanders and we won't."[21]

Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting noted that between 10:20 PM EST Sunday, March 6, to 3:54 PM EST Monday, March 7, a period of about 16 hours, that the Washington Post ran sixteen negative articles on Sanders.[22]

From March 15 to May 3, according to researcher Thomas Patterson, the Republican/Democratic primary coverage split was 64:36, and the Clinton/Sanders media coverage split was 61:39.[3] Patterson ascribes this difference to "the influence of 'electability' on reporting," rather than on polling numbers. This period was the first time in the campaign that Clinton's press was marginally positive and Sanders's press was slightly negative.[3]

Matt Taibbi in Rolling Stone criticized The New York Times for retroactively making online changes to a March 15, 2016 article about Sanders's legislative accomplishments over the past 25 years.[23] In addition to rewording the title, several paragraphs were added.[24] In 2019, Margaret Sullivan, public editor at the NY Times, characterized the changes as "stealth editing" and added that "the changes to this story were so substantive that a reader who saw the piece when it first went up might come away with a very different sense of Sanders' legislative accomplishments than one who saw it hours later."[25]

In April 2016, NPR's media correspondent David Folkenflik responded to criticisms of bias against Sanders saying that Sanders had appeared three times on NPR whereas Clinton had only done so once, that media outlets saw a Sanders win as a "long shot" early in the campaign, and that by April 2016, she appeared very likely to win the nomination.[26] The same month, Ezra Klein and Matthew Yglesias of Vox wrote the media was biased in favor of Sanders because Clinton's lead was becoming increasingly insurmountable, yet the media had a vested commercial interest in exaggerating how close the race was.[27][28]

After the presidential election was over, in January 2017, David Brock apologized to Bernie Sanders for his aggressive support of Clinton during the 2016 campaign.[29]

2020 primary campaign

See also: 2020 Democratic Party presidential primaries and Bernie Sanders 2020 presidential campaign

According to a March 2019 analysis by Northeastern University's School of Journalism, Sanders received the most positive coverage of any major candidate in the 2020 Democratic primary. An updated analysis in April after more candidates had entered the field placed him third out of eight candidates;[12] a further update for June to September of 2019 found that Sanders's positive coverage ranked fourth out of eight major candidates.[13]

In April 2019, Sanders wrote to the board of the Center for American Progress in response to a video produced by their former media outlet ThinkProgress. The video mocked him for becoming a millionaire after writing a book about his 2016 election run.[30][31] The following month, Politico published a feature article on Sanders's income which described him as "rich" and "cheap".[32] Articles in several progressive publications criticized the tone and arguments of Politico's article.[33][34] Andrew Silow-Carroll summarized what he called "selective outrage" after comparing the story to other recent examples of political "conjunction of Jews, money and influence", arguing that, "If you are only enraged by the anti-Semitism of your political enemies, then it’s hard to take your outrage seriously."[35]

In August 2019, Sanders said that The Washington Post did not "write particularly good articles" about him and suggested that it was because he frequently mentioned that Amazon, The Post's parent company, did not pay taxes.[36] Marty Baron, executive editor of The Washington Post, responded, "Contrary to the conspiracy theory the senator seems to favor, Jeff Bezos allows our newsroom to operate with full independence, as our reporters and editors can attest."[36]

In November 2019, Emma Specter at Vogue doubted that there was a conspiracy against Sanders. She also listed several examples of limited coverage of his policy proposals and interpreted lack of coverage of Sanders on certain issues and events as being "only somewhat surprising".[37]

In a December 2019 opinion column for The New York Times, David Leonhardt agreed with Politico co-founder John F. Harris about the media having a centrist bias. Leonardt argued that this hurt Sanders and Warren, particularly in questions posed to both about the issue of a wealth tax.[38]

In the same month, In These Times analyzed coverage of the 2020 Democratic Party presidential primary by MSNBC between August and September 2019.[39][40] They said that "MSNBC talked about Biden twice as often as Warren and three times as often as Sanders", and that Sanders was the candidate spoken of negatively the most frequently of the three."[41]

At the end of December, The Nation declared in a headline that, "The Bernie Blackout is Over".[42] An article in Salon pointed out that the mainstream media had slighted Sanders by downplaying his support, misreporting polling data, ignoring his endorsements by public figures, and questioning the level of support for his policy positions.[43]

The CNN-sponsored debate between Democratic candidates on January 14, 2020, was the subject of criticism over perceived bias against Sanders, especially concerning moderator Abby Phillip's handling of a he-said, she-said controversy between Sanders and fellow Senator and candidate Elizabeth Warren.[44][45][46] Journalism think-tank Poynter Institute called Phillip's treatment of Sanders "stunning in its ineptness and stunning in its unprofessionalism".[47]

MSNBC came under particular scrutiny during the first two primaries due to historical references made by two of their hosts. Chris Matthews compared Sanders to George McGovern, in terms of electability, on February 3 and criticized Sanders for adopting the "democratic socialist" label on February 7.[48][49] His February 7 remarks stated that a stronger influence by Sanders and other left-wing politicians who were active during the Cold War could have resulted in "executions in Central Park".[50][51] The following week, Chuck Todd criticized the rhetoric of Sanders supporters by quoting a conservative article which compared them to brown shirts in the Nazi regime.[52][53]

See also

References

  1. ^ a b c d John Sides; Michael Tesler; Lynn Vavreck (2018). Identity Crisis. Princeton University Press. pp. 8, 99, 104–107. ISBN 978-0-691-17419-8. Archived from the original on November 14, 2019. Retrieved December 8, 2019.
  2. ^ a b c d Thomas E. Patterson, Pre-Primary News Coverage of the 2016 Presidential Race: Trump's Rise, Sanders' Emergence, Clinton's Struggle, archived from the original on November 27, 2019, retrieved December 1, 2019
  3. ^ a b c d Thomas E. Patterson (July 11, 2016), News Coverage of the 2016 Presidential Primaries: Horse Race Reporting Has Consequences, retrieved January 3, 2020, The press did not heavily cover the candidates' policy positions, their personal and leadership characteristics, their private and public histories, background information on election issues, or group commitments for and by the candidates. Such topics accounted for roughly a tenth of the primary coverage.
    Over the course of the primary season, Sanders received only two-thirds of the coverage afforded Clinton. Sanders' coverage trailed Clinton's in every week of the primary season.
  4. ^ Dominico Montanaro (August 13, 2019). "Bernie Sanders Again Attacks Amazon – This Time Pulling In 'The Washington Post'". NPR. Archived from the original on November 27, 2019. Retrieved December 11, 2019.
  5. ^ Morgan Gstalter (August 13, 2019), Washington Post editor calls Sanders claim about campaign coverage a 'conspiracy theory', The Hill, archived from the original on November 30, 2019, retrieved December 1, 2019
  6. ^ Bernie Sanders (2005). "Why Americans Should Take Back the Media". In Robert McChesney; Russell Newman; Ben Scott (eds.). The Future of Media: Resistance and Reform in the 21st Century. Seven Stories Press. ISBN 978-1-58322-679-7. OCLC 57574152. {{cite book}}: |editor3= has generic name (help)
  7. ^ Bernie Sanders (2016). "Corporate Media and the Threat to Our Democracy". Our Revolution: A Future to Believe In. Thomas Dunne Books. p. 434. ISBN 978-1-250-13292-5. OCLC 1026148801.
  8. ^ Jonathan Stray. "How much influence does the media really have over elections? Digging into the data". Nieman Lab. Retrieved December 9, 2019.
  9. ^ Sarah Childress. "Study: Election Coverage Skewed By "Journalistic Bias"". Frontline. PBS.
  10. ^ Nikolas Decosta-Klipa (June 14, 2016). "This Harvard study both confirms and refutes Bernie Sanders's complaints about the media". Boston Globe. Retrieved December 6, 2019.
  11. ^ a b Rachel Bitecofer (2018). "The Unprecedented 2016 Presidential Election". Palgrave: 36–38, 48. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-61976-7. {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  12. ^ a b Alexander Frandsen; Aleszu Bajak (April 24, 2019), Women on the 2020 campaign trail are being treated more negatively by the media, Storybench, archived from the original on October 7, 2019, retrieved December 2, 2019
  13. ^ a b Aleszu Bajak (September 30, 2019), Gabbard, Booker and Biden get most negative media coverage over last four months, Storybench, archived from the original on December 4, 2019, retrieved December 2, 2019
  14. ^ Elizabeth Jensen (August 7, 2015), Feelin' The Bern: Sanders Devotees Speak Out About NPR's Coverage, NPR
  15. ^ Sullivan, Margaret (September 9, 2015). "Has The Times Dismissed Bernie Sanders?". The New York Times. Retrieved December 16, 2019.
  16. ^ Philip Rucker; John Wagner (September 11, 2015). "How Bernie Sanders is plotting his path to the Democratic nomination". The Washington Post.
  17. ^ Sides, John (September 2015). "Is the media biased against Bernie Sanders? Not really". Monkey Cage. The Washington Post.
  18. ^ "Has There Been A Bernie Sanders Blackout? | On the Media". WNYC Studios. And now he's sort of edged up into 30% of coverage. And people have been searching Bernie quite a bit, in the low 50-60 range, and they kind of plateaued into the following winter. So, maybe he's not getting super duper coverage, but he's not not there.
  19. ^ Dan Roberts (January 22, 2016). "Sanders smeared as communist sympathiser as Clinton allies sling mud". The Guardian.
  20. ^ "Clinton ally says Sanders slights minorities in new ad". Las Vegas Sun. January 21, 2016. Archived from the original on January 24, 2016.
  21. ^ Jay Newton-Small (February 24, 2016). "Q&A: David Brock on Attacking Bernie Sanders". Time.
  22. ^ Adam Johnson (March 8, 2016). "Washington Post Ran 16 Negative Stories on Bernie Sanders in 16 Hours". FAIR.
  23. ^ Felix Hamborg, Norman Meuschke, Akiko Aizawa, Bela Gipp (2017). "Identification and Analysis of Media Bias in News Articles" (PDF). In Gäde M, Trkulja V, Petras V (eds.). Everything Changes, Everything Stays the Same? Understanding Information Spaces. Proceedings of the 15th International Symposium of Information Science (ISI 2017). Humbolt-Universität Zu Berlin. pp. 225–226.
  24. ^ Matt Taibbi (March 15, 2016). "How the 'New York Times' Sandbagged Bernie Sanders". Rolling Stone.
  25. ^ Margaret Sullivan (March 17, 2019). "Were Changes to Sanders Article 'Stealth Editing'?". The New York Times.
  26. ^ Mitch Wertlieb; Kathleen Masterson (April 1, 2016), 'Bernie Bias' In The News? NPR's Media Correspondent Responds To Your Critiques, VPR
  27. ^ Matthew Yglesias (April 6, 2016). "After Wisconsin, Sanders is worse off than ever in the delegate race". Vox. Retrieved December 9, 2019.
  28. ^ Ezra Klein (April 7, 2016). "Is the media biased against Bernie Sanders?". Vox. Retrieved December 9, 2019. Sanders's win in Wisconsin, given the state's demographics, didn't imply that the race has changed in ways that put him on track for the nomination. If anything, Tuesday was a night when he fell a bit further behind in the delegate race.
  29. ^ David Brock (January 10, 2017). "Dear Senator Sanders: I'm with You in the Fight Ahead". Medium. Archived from the original on December 29, 2019. Retrieved December 29, 2019.
  30. ^ Elizabeth Williamson; Kenneth P. Vogel (April 15, 2019). "The Rematch: Bernie Sanders vs. a Clinton Loyalist". The New York Times.
  31. ^ Kenneth P. Vogel; Sydney Ember (April 14, 2019). "Bernie Sanders Accuses Liberal Think Tank of Smearing Progressive Candidates". The New York Times. Archived from the original on December 3, 2019. Retrieved December 29, 2019. [Sanders] wrote: 'Meanwhile, the Center for American Progress is using its resources to smear Senator Booker, Senator Warren and myself, among others. This is hardly the way to build unity, or to win the general election.'
  32. ^ Template:Cite article
  33. ^ Template:Cite article
  34. ^ Template:Cite article
  35. ^ Template:Cite article
  36. ^ a b Michael Calderone (August 13, 2019), "Washington Post editor attacks Bernie Sanders' "conspiracy theory"", Politico
  37. ^ Emma Specter (November 8, 2019), "Bernie Sanders Is the Most Progressive Politician in the 2020 Race. Why Aren't More People Talking About Him?", Vogue
  38. ^ David Leonhardt (December 22, 2019). "Opinion | How 'Centrist Bias' Hurts Sanders and Warren". The New York Times. Retrieved December 27, 2019. Once you start thinking about centrist bias, you recognize a lot of it. It helps explain why the 2016 presidential debates focused more on the budget deficit, a topic of centrist zealotry, than climate change, almost certainly a bigger threat. (Well-funded deficit advocacy plays a role too.)
  39. ^ Aleem, Zeeshan (December 20, 2019). "Sanders is hot in the polls, and still treated like a second-tier candidate". Vice. Retrieved February 14, 2020.
  40. ^ Luke Savage (November 20, 2019), The Corporate Media's War Against Bernie Sanders Is Very Real, Jacobin
  41. ^ Chang, Clio (December 20, 2019). "The media can take Bernie Sanders a little seriously, as a treat". Esquire. Retrieved February 14, 2020.
  42. ^ Jeet Heer (December 27, 2019). "The Bernie Blackout Is Over". The Nation.
  43. ^ Sophia A. McClennen (December 30, 2019). "The "Bernie Blackout" appears to be over: How will the media cover the Sanders campaign now?". Salon.
  44. ^ "CNN draws fire for debate question that ignores denial". www.msn.com. Retrieved January 15, 2020.
  45. ^ Swanson, Ian (January 15, 2020). "CNN moderator criticized for question to Sanders". TheHill. Retrieved January 15, 2020.
  46. ^ Carter, Zach (January 15, 2020). "CNN Completely Botched The Democratic Debate". HuffPost. Retrieved January 15, 2020.
  47. ^ Jones, Tom (January 15, 2020). "A media misfire from CNN during the debate » Press may be cut out of some impeachment hearings » Megyn Kelly reacts to 'Bombshell'". Poynter Institute. Retrieved February 14, 2020.
  48. ^ Concha, Joe (February 3, 2020). "Chris Matthews expresses worries: Democrats 'need to find' candidate who can beat Trump". The Hill. Retrieved February 14, 2020.
  49. ^ Woodward, Alex (February 3, 2020). "MSNBC host Chris Matthews gets emotional and says he's 'not happy' with any of the Democratic candidates". The Independent. Retrieved February 14, 2020.
  50. ^ Perrett, Connor (February 8, 2020). "When discussing a possible Bernie Sanders presidency, MSNBC's Chris Matthews ranted about hypothetical executions in Central Park under Castro". Business Insider. Retrieved February 14, 2020.
  51. ^ Graham, David (February 12, 2020). "Bernie Sanders is winning because he's popular". The Atlantic. Retrieved February 14, 2020.
  52. ^ Johnson, Jake (February 12, 2020). "MSNBC's Chuck Todd under fire for reciting quote comparing Sanders supporters to Nazis". Salon. Retrieved February 14, 2020.
  53. ^ Allison Kaplan Sommer (February 11, 2020). "'Meet the Press' host rapped for comparing Sanders supporters to Nazi 'brownshirts'". Haaertz. Retrieved February 14, 2020.

External links

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Media_coverage_of_Bernie_Sanders&oldid=942395442"