Divided Congress & Coverage?

Inspired by Charlie Smart's visualization on The Pudding

Today, Americans are more ideologically divided than anytime in the past. As a result, American consumers increasingly prefer media that confirms to their own political and social preferences, which in turn seeps bias into the content itself. It becomes a vicious feedback loop. Research shows that this bias in content operates via two mechanisms: ISSUE FILTERING and ISSUE FRAMING.

ISSUE FILTERING implies selective coverage of certain topics. Here, the problem isn't fake news or alternative facts, but selective facts. Selective facts are still legitimate facts, but they often times either paint an incomplete picture of a story or leave some stories out altogether. Issue Filtering tells the audience what to think about. It's curated content, but for facts.

ISSUE FRAMING, on the other hand, is about how topics are presented. Framing of a story affects the structure of its message and specifies its field of meaning. So, while Issue Filtering tells the audience what to think about, Issue Framing tells them how to think about it.

There is a ceaseless flow of news everyday, especially during election campaigns. As a result, filtering and framing may affect the audience's views on various topics and push them towards drawing different conclusions, sometimes divisive ones. This happens because people prefer to view information that confirms to their pre-existing beliefs. This phenomenon has often been described as confirmation bias. Moreover, the publishers and platforms presenting this information know what their viewers want and accordingly feed them relevant content. For them, it is as much about viewers and ratings as it is about news itself.

In this project, we visualize the extent of content and coverage bias during the midterm elections of 2018 by examining the cable news headlines for CNN, Fox News and MSNBC during a three day window of before, during and after the elections. Throughout, we attempt to use the mechanism of either FILTERING or FRAMING as our lens. The aim is to understand the aspects of the news cycle that may foster differences in beliefs and perceptions among the viewers.

First, let's explore at how some of the major topics were FILTERED

Let's begin by mapping out some of the most frequently talked about topics by the three news channels during their midterm elections coverage.

Some of the most frequently talked about topics included President Trump, migrants and the House, with the Democratic candidates Beto O'Rourke and Andrew Gillum, and Republican candidate Ted Cruz getting the most proportional coverage.

Hover over the topics below to visualize where they lie on the plot

Next, let's look at the inclusivity of the language used by the three news channels by looking at the number of mentions of under-represented and minority groups.

Overall, CNN and MSNBC frequently mentioned women, black voters, african-american voters, hispanics and gender (gap and/or bias) with little to no mention of many of these groups by FOX NEWS.

Moving on, if we filter out the congressional candidates that generated the most buzz in all three news channels, we can explore some interesting trends.

CNN and MSNBC mentioned Georgia gubernatorial candidates Brian Kemp and Stacey Abrams way more often than FOX NEWS did. Moreover, MSNBC commented on the Arizona senatorial candidates Kristen Sinema and Nancy McSally more often than CNN or FOX NEWS did. Meanwhile, CNN's coverage did not skew towards any candidate.

Lastly, let's also look at some of the most talked about issues during the election.

Immigration and economy were the most talked about issues and got relatively proportional coverage from all three channels. Meanwhile, we saw dispropotionately frequent mentions of Justice Brett Kavanaugh and ICE by FOX NEWS, Facebook, fearmongering and approval-rating by CNN, and abortion and impeachment by MSNBC.

How did the number of mentions compare with the total screen time for various topics?

While cable news may mention some topics more or less frequently than others, there is a possibility that the channels spend significantly more time in talking about a particular headline or topic. So, sometimes the choice of metric can yield different results.

Click and drag the slider to visualize the change in relative rankings when the metrics are altered.

The dark circles highlight the topics that undergo the greatest change in rankings as well as the top ranked topics for each channel.

Note: We have excluded some of the top words like Voters, Trump, Senate and House in order to better fulfill the purpose of the visualization.

MSNBC

Hover over the highlighted circles to discover some interesting trends such as:

The gubernatorial race in Georgia was the most talked about race by MSNBC, in which the Republican candidate Brian Kemp got way more mentions than screen time, and the democratic candidate Stacey Abrams got way more screen time than mentions.
CNN had the most consistent coverage among the three channels. There wasn't a high discrepancy between the number of mentions and the total screen time in case of any topic.

FOX

Next, let's explore how some of the major topics were FRAMED

In choosing and displaying news, editors, newsroom staff, and broadcasters play an important part in shaping political reality. Readers learn not only about a given issue, but also how much importance to attach to that issue from the amount of information in a news story and its position. In reflecting what candidates are saying during a campaign, the mass media may well determine the important issues—that is, the media may set the 'agenda' of the campaign.

- McCombs & Shaw

Let's begin by exploring which topics were frequently mentioned together.

CNN

When it came to voters, CNN often talked about them in terms of their approval of President Trump, in terms of voters in states of Florida and Georgia and in conjunction with issues such as immigration and healthcare.

However, President Trump himself was associated with issues such as (anti-)immigration and the economy.

FOX

FOX NEWS frequently mentioned voters in conjunction with President Trump, the economy, and while referring to voters from the state of Texas.

Meanwhile, President Trump was often mentioned in conjuction with the economy, the issue of immigration and the Mueller-investigation.

MSNBC

MSNBC compratively focused on a wider variety of contexts and issues when it came to voters. It included President Trump, immigration and the economy. It also included references to voters from Florida, Geogia and Texas. Moreover, they also referred to other divisive issues such as tax and abortion.

President Trump was mentioned in conjunction with issues mostly pertaining to the economy and immigration.

Which action verbs were often used with some of the dominant topics?

Action verbs serve as powerful tools in creating ideas and impressions. By exploring what action verbs were most frequently associated with the major topics, we can further contextualize how those topics were framed.

Click and drag the circles to isolate the verbs by topic.

You can also click on the verbs to view the relevant news segments (archived).

CNN

FOX

MSNBC

Design from xliberation.com

So, while MSNBC talked about how polls show that majority of the voters prefer a Dem-controlled Congress, CNN reported on how polls show that a majority of the voters are voting to send a message on President Trump.

While CNN reported on how migrants were being demonized as the military troops headed towards the border to deny them entry, FOX NEWS quoted President Trump as he warned the public about illegal immigration and reassured them that the migrants were not coming to this country.

There is so much information around us that it forces us to filter some things out, and at the same time, add meaning to what we choose to focus on. We look for stories we like and patterns we can understand. We yearn for simplification. We are running out of time. We want to know what to remember and what to forget. This adds bias to much of what we choose to perceive. This is how we function.

So, it is important for us to know that the information we are being supplied is also filtered and framed. Therefore, while it may not be conceivable for us to see everything, it is possible for us to to broaden our understanding, be aware of our differences and be more accomodating.