If your perception is that the U.S. news media paid considerably more attention to yesterday’s baldly partisan and error-ridden ruling against the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act by a Republican-appointed Federal District Court Judge than they have in the past to similar rulings in favor of last year’s history-making health-care reform legislation ... well, you’re not alone.
And you’re not wrong.
The Washington Monthly’s Steve Benen went carefully back through the coverage by four prominent national press organizations to weigh how they have reported court rulings that bolstered the arguments of health-care reform proponents against how they reported on an equal number of federal rulings against it, and found that “the coverage discrepancy is overwhelming. ... In literally every instance, the Republican-friendly rulings generated more coverage, with better placement, and longer stories than the rulings preferred by Democrats.”
Benen’s findings are here.
READ MORE: “What Happens If Conservatives Succeed in Undermining the ACA?” by Ezra Klein (The Washington Post); “Why Judge Vinson’s Decision Matters,” by Kevin Drum (Mother Jones).