We have a relationship with the folks at Media Tenor International … a quick “about” from their site:

[MTI] is an independent and non-partisan organization, founded 10 years ago and based in Bonn, Germany, with offices in Pretoria, South Africa, Ostrava, Czech Republic, London, U.K. and New York, U.S.

More than 180 media analysts track and code approximately 250 media from different countries every day. Based on the data, Media Tenor’s research offers an objective understanding of the influence of media on politics, the economy and society.

Their content analysis methodology is strong, and we’ve been getting their reports on the MSM coverage of the election for some time. They already have their analysis of the third debate online here (note: PDF file).

In tonight’s TV debate, neither of the candidates managed to gain an upper hand in the overall discussion. There were no significant surprises on how each candidate views the issues that were addressed. Based on Bob Schieffer’s excellent moderation, the debate was able to create a very clear image (almost 80% of the content was issue-focused) on the different approaches Kerry and Bush will use in tackling challenges in healthcare, economics, social issues and domestic security.

Mistakes
4 years ago, the U.S. media declared Bush the winner of the debate because he somewhat exceeded the low expectations the audience and the media had set. Tonight, the performances of both candidates were without major errors. Attacks were present, but for the first time Bush no longer actively portrayed the senator as a “flip-flopper.”

That was in stark contrast with the first and second debates, during which he regularly (about once every nine minutes) accused Kerry of being inconsistent. It is surprising that Bush shifted his approach, since Kerry’s alleged inconsistency was able to draw more media attention than any other issue since the beginning of the debates.

Content
Both candidates’ responses generally fit into their party’s respective molds. A significant difference from the pre-debate media coverage, however, was the focus on hard issues vs. the horse race. Kerry managed to deliver his views on health, religion, the economy, employment and foreign policy, while President Bush defended his policies and argued that Kerry’s plans were flawed. In particular, Kerry’s arguments on economic mismanagement should have some merit with the public, just when the media’s reporting on the economy has reached its lowest point in 2004. This shows the impact of the “It’s the economy, stupid” spin doctors that Kerry have recently brought onto his campaign team.

Projection
After this third debate, it’s likely that the next polls (from respectable sources, not those carried out by websites or non-scientific institutions that flooded the media in the last week) will continue to show a very close race. If the media continues to focus on the horserace rather than content, Kerry may be able to maintain the positive image that polls have created, but the risk of failure will be high if voters can’t clearly remember the policies he
stands for.

Posted by Alan at October 14, 2004 06:56 AM | TrackBack