Analysis of information sources in references of the Wikipedia article "Media coverage of Bernie Sanders" in English language version.
[Sanders] wrote: 'Meanwhile, the Center for American Progress is using its resources to smear Senator Booker, Senator Warren and myself, among others. This is hardly the way to build unity, or to win the general election.'
Once you start thinking about centrist bias, you recognize a lot of it. It helps explain why the 2016 presidential debates focused more on the budget deficit, a topic of centrist zealotry, than climate change, almost certainly a bigger threat. (Well-funded deficit advocacy plays a role too.)
The press did not heavily cover the candidates' policy positions, their personal and leadership characteristics, their private and public histories, background information on election issues, or group commitments for and by the candidates. Such topics accounted for roughly a tenth of the primary coverage.
Over the course of the primary season, Sanders received only two-thirds of the coverage afforded Clinton. Sanders' coverage trailed Clinton's in every week of the primary season.
Sanders's win in Wisconsin, given the state's demographics, didn't imply that the race has changed in ways that put him on track for the nomination. If anything, Tuesday was a night when he fell a bit further behind in the delegate race.
[Sanders] wrote: 'Meanwhile, the Center for American Progress is using its resources to smear Senator Booker, Senator Warren and myself, among others. This is hardly the way to build unity, or to win the general election.'
And now he's sort of edged up into 30% of coverage. And people have been searching Bernie quite a bit, in the low 50-60 range, and they kind of plateaued into the following winter. So, maybe he's not getting super duper coverage, but he's not not there.
{{cite book}}: |editor3= has generic name (help)