October 2008

Media Use

Texans were asked to assess news media coverage of the campaign and of candidates. In general, they saw coverage of John McCain and Sarah Palin as much more unfair than coverage of Barack Obama and Joe Biden.

Respondents were asked the following question about each of the four principal candidates:

"On a scale from 0 to 10, where 0 is extremely unfair, 10 is extremely fair, and 5 is exactly in the middle, how fair or unfair have the news media been to [candidate] during this campaign?"

When asked to rate news media coverage of John McCain, 45% of Texans rated it unfair (0-4), 32.5% judged it to be fair (6-10), and 23% judged it in the middle (5). The average rating of McCain's coverage was 4.4; well below the mid-point of 5. Registrants saw news media coverage of Palin as even more negative: 51% rated it unfair, 28% fair, and 21% in the middle. The average rating of Palin's coverage was 3.8.

When asked about the news media and the Democratic ticket, respondents were more likely to rate coverage as "fair" than they were for either McCain or Palin. When asked about Obama, 67% of Texans judged coverage to be in the "fair" range, compared to only 12% calling it "unfair" and 21% rating it in the middle. The average rating of Obama's coverage was 7.3; approximately 3 points higher than the mean rating of news media coverage of McCain. Coverage of Joe Biden was rated as fair by 59%, unfair by 8%, and in the middle by 33%. The average rating of Biden's coverage was 6.9.

This perception of relatively favorable news media treatment does not extend to all Democratic candidates. When asked about news media coverage of Hillary Clinton, 39% rated it as fair, 30% as unfair, and 31% as in the middle. The average rating of news media coverage of Clinton was 5.3.

Breaking the responses down by party, Republicans and, to a lesser extent, independents, were more likely to find the coverage of McCain and Palin unfair than were Democrats. Democrats, however, did not register the same degree of criticism of coverage of the Obama-Biden ticket.

To ascertain where Texans get their political news, we asked what percent of their information comes from, respectively, broadcast television, local television, cable television, newspaper, radio, the Internet, and magazines. Perhaps surprisingly, cable TV comes in first, with an average of 36%, followed by broadcast TV (20%), the Internet (19%), local TV (15%), radio (13%), newspapers (7%), and magazines (4%). Although the summation of these estimated percentages suggests people have trouble with the notion of 100% representing the whole, the data clearly indicate a shift in the locus of political information -- away from local TV news and newspapers and towards talk radio and the Internet.

July 2008

Issue Priorities and Positions

We also asked our Texas respondents a more limited set of of public policy questions about issues and problems facing the nation. As discussed in section 1.1, respondents registered concern about the state of the economy. Forty-two percent identified the economy as the nation's most important issue, more than double the 18% registered for the next most highly rated issue (gas/oil prices). The next three most important issues were the war in Iraq (8%), immigration (7%), and terrorism/national security (6%).

Iraq War

Texans are split over the proper course of action in Iraq. Twenty seven percent favor an immediate and complete withdrawal of U.S. military forces, while 38% prefer a gradual withdrawal, with troops being kept in Iraq until the situation becomes more stable. Still, this split should not obscure the fact that relatively few people favor a more aggressive posture: only 29% favor either increasing U.S. forces in Iraq or some version of the current status quo.

Lone Star residents are also skeptical about the long-term prospects for democracy in Iraq. Fifty three percent say democracy is "unlikely" in Iraq, compared to 39% saying it is "likely."

Immigration

Texans' attitudes on immigration are perhaps more nuanced than we have been heretofore lead to believe. Asked about what should happen to illegal immigrants who have been working in the U.S. for two years, 49% say they should have a chance to stay and gain resident status. Conversely, 43% say they should be deported to their country of origin. As might be expected, these results vary sharply by ethnicity. Among Anglos, the majority favor deportation (52%-35%), but among Hispanics there is overwhelming support for giving illegal immigrants a chance to stay (70%-23%).