The news Americans see on network television has softened considerably since 2001l, to the point that it looks more like it did before the terrorist attacks than immediately after.
Four months into the war, a review of news coverage reveals that over time Americans are getting fewer facts and more opinion — a narrow range of opinion, at that — from newspapers, magazines and television. At the same time, polls show the press losing a measure of the respect it had gained in …
A review of the early press coverage of George W. Bush's administration reveals some unexpected and troubling features of contemporary political journalism: even the most serious newspapers in the country have pulled back dramatically on covering the presidency.
This study attempted to discern the nature of the press coverage of the story by examining several major threads of the story and comparing them to the Starr Report and its supporting evidentiary material. Contrary to White House accusations, those doing the bulk of the original reporting did not ferry false leaks and fabrications into coverage. But in some important cases, the press leaned on the suspicions of investigators that did not hold up and downplayed the denials of the accused, according to a new study. The findings raise questions about whether the press always maintained adequate skepticism about its sources.