Abstract
Content analysis of newspaper stories covering eleven U.S. Senate races in 2006 showed most stories favoring Democratic and other liberal candidates. Individual stories favored liberal candidates more than Republicans. Newsrooms with greater proportions of women editors were more even in total stories favoring conservative and liberal candidates. Stories covering open races and stories from newsrooms with a greater proportion of women reporters tended to provide more evenly balanced treatment of candidate assertions. Partisanship of a lead was a strong predictor of that story's partisan tilt. Findings suggest that conventions of fairness and balance were not controlling coverage.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
