Covering The Birther "issue" Perpetuated The Conspiracy Theory

So says New York Times media reporter Brian Stelter. Stelter wrote:

So who covered it the most?

From the Pew Project for Excellence in Journalism:

MSNBC
including “The Ed Show,” “Hardball,” “The Last Word,” and “The Rachel Maddow Show”

- 28% of airtime studied was devoted to the 2012 election
- 10% of airtime studied was devoted to Obama
- A subset of that Obama airtime was coded “citizenship and religion rumors” to include “birther” coverage, which was 92% of the Obama coverage

Fox
including “Special Report w/Bret Baier,” “Fox Report w/Shepard Smith,” “The O’Reilly Factor,” “Hannity”

- 16% of airtime studied was devoted to 2012 election
- 5% of airtime studied was devoted to Obama
- A subset of that Obama airtime was coded “citizenship and religion rumors” to include “birther” coverage, which was 8% of the Obama coverage

CNN
including “The Situation Room,” “John King, USA,” “In The Arena,” and “Anderson Cooper 360″

- 11% of airtime studied was devoted to 2012 election
- 5% of airtime studied was devoted to Obama
- A subset of that Obama airtime was coded “citizenship and religion rumors” to include “birther” coverage, which was 100% of the Obama coverage.

Ace crunched the numbers and found the following breakdown of birther stories as a percentage of total coverage for each cable news channel:

- Fox News: 0.4 percent

- MSNBC: 9.2 percent

- CNN: 5 percent

Well done liberals!

 

Weeks ago, a significant number of people of all stripes had legitimate doubts enough to be considered birthers--and the news coverage is warranted. Now that it's been debunked, I suppose it will be necessary to argue that they were never really that many people who were birthers. Thus, the news coverage was unwarranted.

 

The question is, why was Fox news' coverage so minimal?

Given their tendency to make shit up, according to Gabfry, and being a front for Koch Industries and the republican party, one would expect they would have been leading the charge. Seeing as doing so perpetuated the problem for Obama.

 

I don't read it very often, but how was the issue's coverage measured, quantity, depth, weighted average? They don't like Trump? ; ) Your question is a good one.

 

It is pretty obvious that legitimate right wing media tried to distance themselves from the issue. It is also obvious that the clowns at MSNBC were simply drumming it up in order to try to make conservatives look stupid. I honestly dont think i can ever remember getting through an entire show by Chris Matthews where he didnt bring up the topic.

Edit: Thats a lie actually. Prior to 2009, Chris Matthews never brought up the birther issue.

 

Birthers are, to a man, conservative or members of the GOP. This is an embarrassing thing and FOX does not cover it for the same reasons they do not cover log cabin republicans.

 

No question that the "adults" in the GOP see the birther issue hurting their 2012 chances and their official news organization is trying to downplay it as well. Gov. Brewer vetoing an AZ birther bill and presenting a lame explanation is just an example.

OTOH-the boys at MSNBC keep it up in an attempt to paint the GOP as lunatics.

Seneca

 

Corrected for you.

 

I'm curious why the media saw it as their job to debunk the issue, rather than just finding out the facts and reporting them.

They had to wait for Trump to do their jobs for them. Now, of course, he's a racist. I guess this is just a fore shadowing of what's in store for anyone who has the temerity to raise questions about el presidente. Clearly a warning shot to try and intimidate others.

It worked like a charm in 2008. McCain was afraid to do anything but praise obama. You ended up wondering why McCain was even running and if he and his family were planning on voting for obama.

 

Because they, like the rest of the planet, were satisfied with the first BC?

And to all: I think maybe AMT alone can perpetuate this theory!