Gallup: 57% think media’s coverage of Palin is either fair or too positive
posted at 12:10 pm on September 15, 2008 by Allahpundit
If Chevy Chase thinks so, who among us would disagree?
Not that surprising, really.
Start with the fact that most people don’t follow media watchdog websites and thus aren’t aware of any bias they don’t see with their own two eyes. Remember that we’re now fully two weeks removed from the nastiest part of the coverage, Bristolgate and the Trig Trutherism, the latter of which didn’t penetrate deeply into the media’s finished product. Factor in the raves she got from talking heads for her convention speech, when the audience was literally 40 times the size of what any given cable news show that might be badmouthing her is pulling at any hour of the day. And then consider that the public’s probably willing to give the press more leeway than usual in covering her since they want to know the good, the bad, and the ugly ASAP before having to pull the lever in seven weeks. Frankly, I’m impressed that the number of independents saying it’s been too negative is as high as it is.
The X factor is the Gibson interview, of course — which Gallup very stupidly didn’t account for, conducting this survey on Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday of last week before it aired. Time for a re-poll? Be careful what you wish for. Exit question: Who on earth are those 11 percenters among the GOP who think the coverage has been too positive? Disgruntled Mittheads, maybe?
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Ron Paultards.
Dr.Cwac.Cwac on September 15, 2008 at 12:12 PM
69% either think the press is covering Palin “about right” or “negative.” The actual breakdown would be that 12% more people think that the press is covering Palin negatively compared to positively. That would be the honest way to report this poll.
Capitalist Infidel on September 15, 2008 at 12:14 PM
I figure they just polled San Francisco.
t.ferg on September 15, 2008 at 12:14 PM
Christine Todd Whittman style RINOs
D0WNT0WN on September 15, 2008 at 12:15 PM
Exit suggestion: perhaps the notion that all people tell the truth at polls is a bit absurd. Concern trolls, anyone?
Aristotle on September 15, 2008 at 12:15 PM
I suspect the stuff on the TV is pretty positive.
The nasty stuff is on the Internet, is it not?
Elizabetty on September 15, 2008 at 12:15 PM
Yup Paultards.
Griz on September 15, 2008 at 12:15 PM
Another way to spin it is 69% believe coverage is fair or unfairly negative and only 21% believe it is unfairly positive.
poljunkie on September 15, 2008 at 12:16 PM
Tells you all you need to know. Half of America, including most Democrats, are idiots.
Dr.Cwac.Cwac on September 15, 2008 at 12:16 PM
Those 11 percenters???? I think they are Democrats.
bloggless on September 15, 2008 at 12:17 PM
Given three broad categories, it would be shocking if the numbers for one exceeded the other two combined.
Leave out the “about right”, and you see that more think MSM coverage of Palin is too negative than too positive, even among independents, who also think coverage of O’Biden has been too positive.
The Monster on September 15, 2008 at 12:17 PM
So among independents there’s 10% more who think the coverage has been unfairly negative. And more Dems think it has been too negative than GOPers who think it has been too positive. And it doesn’t include the Gibson interview.
Karl on September 15, 2008 at 12:17 PM
Paulians?
Perhaps seminar callers?
MarkTheGreat on September 15, 2008 at 12:18 PM
Why would you single-out disgruntled mittheads? Why not disgruntled Hucka-bots or the Paul-estinians as others have suggested. Sounds liek you’re still disgruntled about Mitt. I was and still am a Mitthead, but I can see that Palin was a great choice and I have a feeling that most Mittheads feel the same.
DWSC on September 15, 2008 at 12:18 PM
Nearly a third of Independents think the MSM are being unfair to Palin.
Loxodonta on September 15, 2008 at 12:18 PM
We owe the media many thanks for printing and producing everthing the pundits have said about Sarah Palin—-how else are the public going to see who the idiots are?
Soccer,hockey, and everyday working moms are flocking to the McCain/Palin ticket every time these morons attack the lady. Keep up the good work Leftys—-we couldn’t do it without you.
Rovin on September 15, 2008 at 12:19 PM
I agree. More people think the coverage has been unfairly negative than think it has been overly positive. No big surprises here.
forest on September 15, 2008 at 12:20 PM
Chevy chase is such a loser. Look at that picture of him.
bloggless on September 15, 2008 at 12:20 PM
I don’t know. The poll shows that all but Dems think the press is more “unfairly negative” than “unfairly positive” by substantial amounts. The “fair” opinion is pretty flat, throughout.
BTW, I don’t know what genius thought up the term “unfairly positive”. That has to be one of the dumbest phrases I’ve seen. What they meant was ‘overly positive’, or ‘overenthusiastically positive’ or something like that. But ‘unfairly’? That’s just weird.
progressoverpeace on September 15, 2008 at 12:21 PM
Those 11% GOPers that think the Palin coverage is too rosy are probably those Democrats that registered as Republicans so that they could spoil the primaries and haven’t bothered to change the affiliation back.
SPCOlympics on September 15, 2008 at 12:22 PM
I hope this poll includes all 57 states!
canopfor on September 15, 2008 at 12:23 PM
Count this as one more reason I don’t trust Gallup.
Maxx on September 15, 2008 at 12:23 PM
I knew it! All those reporters flooding into Alaska are there to find leads on stories about how wonderful she is!
/moron
CurtZHP on September 15, 2008 at 12:25 PM
The first question that occurred to me is who paid for this Democrat-damage-control push poll?
.
(Which also explains why “…the Gibson interview, of course — which Gallup very stupidly didn’t account for,” Not stupid at all, when you want a certain result from the poll.)
DavePa on September 15, 2008 at 12:26 PM
Those 11%,are probably,the bitters and clingers,
(you know I’m kidding!)a hem!
canopfor on September 15, 2008 at 12:27 PM
Andrew Sullivan conservatives.
Rick on September 15, 2008 at 12:28 PM
Or they’re the “I’m a lifelong Republican, but…” crowd.
crazy_legs on September 15, 2008 at 12:28 PM
This Mitthead is not disgruntled, but if we must point to one category of disgruntled voters to account for the entire 11% (a premise I find unlikely) what about Paulbots?
Buy Danish on September 15, 2008 at 12:29 PM
In case you haven’t seen it:
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2008/09/14/sunday-funnies-lying-king-exposes-medias-palin-attacks
gumble on September 15, 2008 at 12:30 PM
The real way to look at these polls is to compare responses to the “fairness” question for ALL the candidates. What do you find?
McCain: Too positive 13% Fair 53% Too negative 30%
Palin: 21% 36% 33%
The One: 32% 47% 16%
Biden: 15% 49% 11%
What you find is a significant skewing in favor of the notion that the Republican candidates are getting the shaft (too negative) and the Democratic candidates are getting too positive of coverage. The fact that Gallup couldn’t even get 20% of respondents to claim that media coverage of The One or Biden was “negative” is very revealing. When Democrats, as a group, are pleased with the media coverage of their own candidates, what’s that telling you?
Outlander on September 15, 2008 at 12:30 PM
Let me move my earlier post to this one, it is more appropriate here.
right2bright on September 15, 2008 at 12:32 PM
why in the world is anyone… anyone referring to Chevy Chase….. answer: no frikkin reason under the sun.
MNDavenotPC on September 15, 2008 at 12:32 PM
Answer: The AllahPundits of the world, ie, those who have been influenced by our host.
Mcguyver on September 15, 2008 at 12:35 PM
Why do independents always score highest in “No Opinion”?
DarkCurrent on September 15, 2008 at 12:36 PM
And asthmatic kids on breathalyzers.
Dr.Cwac.Cwac on September 15, 2008 at 12:37 PM
So if McCain’s sudden popularity isn’t due to a backlash against the blatant anti-Palin smear campaign… it must mean there’s something positive about the McCain/Palin ticket that people are responding to.
Sounds good to me, Gallup!
Jim Treacher on September 15, 2008 at 12:41 PM
And they expect the rest of us to believe this as the gospel truth?
I don’t think so!
Right now, I don’t even trust the MSM to report the weather!
pilamaye on September 15, 2008 at 12:48 PM
Maybe most people some some of the biographical coverage on Gov. Palin on Fox, and even some of the other networks, and were satisfied that they got to know her well enough. Maybe they’re feeling satisfied that the drive-bys can’t pull the ol’ wool completely over their eyes anymore.
NellE on September 15, 2008 at 12:56 PM
saw some
NellE on September 15, 2008 at 12:58 PM
Gallup:…..What planet are you polling?
Perhaps you should turn on your damn TV, this is a perfect example why these polls are total b/s.
try again later on September 15, 2008 at 1:00 PM
Given the internals of this poll, it’s very misleading to headline this as “57% think media coverage is fair or too positive”. The “fair” way to headline this is: “Americans think Media Coverage of Palin is Too Negative by 33-21%”.
The headline gives the impression that the majority think that press coverage of Palin is too positive, but the actual poll numbers show that more people think it’s too negative than too positive.
Steve Z on September 15, 2008 at 1:00 PM
The poll is biased.
Here is the question and possible responses:
In fact, the poll shows 33% of Americans think the coverage has been unfairly negative, while only 16% of Americans think the coverage has been unfairly positive. A total of 36% of Americans think the coverage has been down the middle, or fair or “about right”.
This poll is not one to worry about. It shows that more and more Americans are rejecting the media filter and are focusing on the candidates for who they are, which is what we want.
indythinker on September 15, 2008 at 1:01 PM
speaking of Paultards, has he told the people in his district they shouldn’t get any Federal help and they should re-build themselves, that it was their fault/responsibility since they ‘chose’ to live so close to ocean?
in paultard land, its a choice to live where the oil industry centers logistically and from which feeds the nation Oil supplies.
jp on September 15, 2008 at 1:07 PM
Too positive, my butt.
CNN can’t even air a special on Palin without getting some fat guy in a beard up there to regurgitate lies about banning books.
Ryan Gandy on September 15, 2008 at 1:10 PM
You’ve probably got the Ron Pautards, Mittheads, and a bunch of trophy wives who are jealous that Sarah Palin has a better hair stylist and pair of stiletto heels than they do. At least I know that if I wasn’t going to like her that would probably be the only reason I could think of. :)
bethany on September 15, 2008 at 1:10 PM
My first thought as well.
Grafted on September 15, 2008 at 1:11 PM
Balderdash
Domino on September 15, 2008 at 1:19 PM
Maybe because the so-called Hucka-bots actually love Sarah Palin. Her and Bobby Jindal are the closest thing to Huckabee and thus, makes them very happy.
jparks1972 on September 15, 2008 at 1:22 PM
Hey as a disgruntled Mitthead… I think the coverage of Sarah Palin is disgusting! I truly don’t get how anyone could think it fair. How about let’s start a rumour that Michelle is not the true mother of Obama’s children and have every network send a crew to Kenya in order check out the rumours…. Stupid your new name is Media.
petunia on September 15, 2008 at 1:27 PM
Not just book banning but the long debunked rumour that she favored teaching Creationism in schools is now conventional wisdom. They just say it and no one corrects them.
petunia on September 15, 2008 at 1:29 PM
Some of them just use the polls as sort their life line in Who Wants to be a Millionaire. They just see who gets the majority and they vote that way.
petunia on September 15, 2008 at 1:31 PM
Uh, you? I noticed you couched this in terms of 57% thinking it was too positive or just right. You could just as easily couched it in terms of 69% thinking it was too negative or just right. Your commentary on Palin ever since her announcement has been decidedly guarded, bordering on ambivalent. You’ve done a yeoman’s work in combating the obvious smears and outright lies, but I can’t help detect a bit of distaste in your writing every time you have to mention her.
Whatever… It seems to me that you acceptance of her nomination extends only so far as she will be able to help Obama’s opponent win. Does the prospect of her being the new face of the GOP disgust you? If so, who would you rather be the GOP’s ideological standard-bearer?
spmat on September 15, 2008 at 1:42 PM
I figured the bay area in general. The folks in Bearkley and Oakland would see this as fair…
SuperCool on September 15, 2008 at 1:52 PM
There’s a woman who is actually married to Chevy Chase? Eww!
whitetop on September 15, 2008 at 2:12 PM
Allah actually did a very good job of disecting a very poorly-worded and ridiculously poorly-constructed poll: A Poll About Nothing.
The terminology was awkward and sloppy, making the results ( especially in light of the Gibson Gotcha ) meaningless
avert your eyes, move along, and forget it……..
Janos Hunyadi on September 15, 2008 at 3:20 PM
Those would be Michael Savage and Rick Roberts listeners.
Sultry Beauty on September 15, 2008 at 4:16 PM
What this poll actually illustrates is the power of propaganda. It is difficult for the average American to know what is true and what is not. Frightening.
Steve McCullough on September 15, 2008 at 4:20 PM
What I suspect.
91Veteran on September 15, 2008 at 11:43 PM
Leftards who are lying about being Republicans, duh. Smarten up, Allahpundit.
WasatchMan on September 16, 2008 at 5:42 AM