more network news coverage does not necessary mean more favorable coverage.
This is important, when measuring volume as this is often misconstrued as frequency or amount, in the case of elections, limiting analysis to text or language, this assumption can be mistakenly made.
because the visual content of candidate portrayals, such as facial expressions, candidate behavior (e.g., embracing supporters, shaking hands with high-status figures and celebrities, hugging babies), or appearances adorned with patriotic symbols, is likely to be under the control of the candidates or their image handlers
Strong justification for my multi-modal research, as it will investigate whether these visual components were manipulated or not?
there is no persistent trend of partisan bias toward candidates of either party over the four election cycles examined, let alone a consistent liberal slant to the news.
Will the same results persist when I narrow it down for the 2024 U.S. presidential election?
Volume in this context refers to how much media attention a particular party or candidate received.
If it was the case that broadcast news was bias, the bias in this context would be seen to lean more Republican than it would Democrat. In the 2024 U.S. election, it was the case that coverage (number currently unknown) would have featured Trump more as he was running for second term, said newsworthy outrageous things such as Mexicans eating Americans cats and dogs and so on. But then again, literature has pointedly contended that women, more specifically WOC are more likely to be covered as they are breaking gender boundaries. Is this the case? Where does the visual bias tend to lie more?
This chapter measures visual bias that occurs in broadcast news. Examining the visual packaging of general election news, this chapter aims to explain how and why this trend exist including the argument of journalist occasionally submitting to control of image handlers to construct the visual portrayal of politicians. In the context of my study, and research question "how do conservative and liberal news outlets represent Kamala Harris race and gender in the 2024 presidential election?" a much larger debate comes into play here, whether broadcast news can be visually bias, and if so how as this chapter aims to answer. Considering the first debate between Trump and Harris took place on ABC News , a more left centrist, the criticism from right-wing news channel Fox alongside Trump's populist perspective that Harris was not challenged or questioned hard enough, will make for an interesting analysis of visual bias and whether this is what occured in this election
Yet despite the tendency to discard what was said and remember what was seen, verbal communication has been assigned a higher cultural value than visuals.
In short, the entire argument of this chapter is that visuals have been disregarded as having poor cultural capital. However, neuroscience research has illustrated that when watching news reports, visuals are highly remembered, in particularly in political events such as political leaders. For example, face processing may occur as cues can be reveal about leadership or evoke emotional response. In sum, images are compelling are build a better narrative than lingustics alone.