NOYB wrote:

From today's Howard Kurtz column in the NY Times:

While Bush was drawing 49 percent positive coverage during the Iraq war on
the ABC, CBS and NBC nightly news shows, that figure plummeted to 26 percent
positive from May 1 through Oct. 31, says a study of 1,876 broadcast stories
by the Center for Media and Public Affairs.
The figures include comments by critics, such as former Army secretary
Thomas White, who told ABC in September that the administration's postwar
efforts were "totally inadequate." They also include what anchors and
correspondents said.

The Iraq coverage was most negative toward Bush on CBS (77 percent) and
least negative on NBC (62 percent), the study says. Taking numerous hits
were the CIA (77 percent negative), the Pentagon (74 percent negative) and
the Homeland Security Department (68 percent negative).

But such numbers could change dramatically with the arrest of Saddam
Hussein. "Without a doubt," said Matthew T. Felling of the media center,
"the capture of Hussein will turn coverage around" if there are no major
setbacks in Iraq.

------------------------------------------------------------

3/4 of CBS's reporting dealt with "negatives" in Iraq...which means less
than 1/4 dealt with the "positives". Is it because bad news sells better
than good news? Or is it because of a stark anti-Bush and anti-war bias in
the media?


It's because the negatives outweigh the positives in numbers and in
import. D'oh.


--
Email sent to is never read.