Politico: Trump boosted, Clinton hurt by primary media coverage [View all]
http://www.politico.com/story/2016
Based on the eight outlets studied, the ad-equivalent value of Trump's media coverage was worth approximately $55 million. The next closest candidate, Jeb Bush, trailed by $19 million, with an ad-equivalent value of coverage totaling around $36 million. As far as the medias claims that it has been covering Trump in watchdog mode, the study appears to discount that notion. The majority of Trump coverage was positive or neutral in all outlets studied, ranging from 63 percent by The New York Times to 74 percent by USA Today.
Snip
The Democratic side of the race received significantly less attention from the media, particularly during the early phase of the campaign in which Clinton jumped out to large polling leads over the likes of Sanders, Martin O'Malley, Jim Webb and Lincoln Chafee. In terms of good news vs. bad news, Sanders was the beneficiary of the most favorable coverage during what the report calls the invisible primary.
Just as media coverage boosted Trump in the polls, it slowly ate away at Clintons advantage. Among Clinton, Trump, Sanders and Cruz, the former secretary of state earned the highest percentage of coverage related to issues a relatively small 28 percent, while just 12 percent of Trump coverage related to issues. For Cruz, just 9 percent of coverage related to the issues, while 7 percent of coverage was issue-related for Sanders. But in issue-related coverage of Clinton, an overwhelming 84 percent was negative in tone, the study found, compared with 43 percent for Trump, 32 percent for Cruz and just 17 percent for Sanders.
Trump is the GOP candidate for no other reason than that the media wanted him to be. Pretty frightening, IMO.
And it's no surprise to find out that the media is also an obvious hater that Hillary Clinton has repeatedly defeated at their own game. Just like all the others she brushes off on her way to getting progressive work done.