CONTACT: Trey Pollard (202) 495-3058
November 21, 2012
New Report: In the Election Home Stretch, Swing State Media Coverage On Energy Improved But Still Favored Polluter Priorities
As Polluter Spending Spiked, Ohio Energy Coverage Tilted
Visit the Energy Truth Blog For More
Full Report Data Available Here
(Washington, DC) A new
report prepared by Media Matters for America finds that media coverage in swing states continued to favor big polluter priorities as Oil and Gas companies spent hundreds of millions during the last months of the 2012 election. While some
newspapers in key swing states improved coverage of energy issues in the weeks
leading up to the election, most continued to neglect the benefits and
popularity of public health safeguards and clean energy solutions.
An initial
study of swing state energy
coverage from the beginning of July to
mid-August found 11 newspapers across Colorado, New Hampshire, Nevada, Pennsylvania,
Ohio, and Virginia often focused exclusively on arguments used by Big Oil and
Big Coal industry groups, omitting discussion of the benefits of public health
safeguards and the popularity of clean energy. In response, Sierra Club
launched the new Energy
Truth
website to help track and counter propaganda from big polluters and push back
against imbalanced coverage with facts on clean energy and environmental and
public health safeguards.
But, in the last two months of this election cycle
alone, political groups linked to dirty energy spent
more than $270 million on TV ads in an attempt to control the energy narrative. This most recent analysis
tracks the coverage of relevant issues from August 16 to October 31 in the same
newspapers, as polluter spending spiked. The major findings of the study and a comparison with the first
data set are detailed below.
The Findings:
1) Across all six
states, the benefits of public health and environmental safeguards still
frequently go unreported.
New
public health and environmental safeguards proposed and implemented in the last
several years are poised to save tens of thousands of lives and billions of
dollars in health costs annually. The new Mercury and Air Toxics Standards for
Power Plants are expected to prevent up to 11,000 premature deaths and 130,000
cases of aggravated asthma each year while saving American families up to $90
billion in health costs by curbing the pollution in our air and water. Still,
as polluter spending rose this election cycle, these and other benefits were rarely reported - particularly in
Ohio, though Virginia recorded a significant improvement.
- Colorado: 59% of 27 stories (up 9% from previous report)
- New Hampshire: 0% of 4 stories (no change from previous report)
- Nevada: 26% of 23 stories (down 7% from previous report)
- Ohio: 20% of 15 stories (down 21% from previous report)
- Pennsylvania: 51% of 75 stories (up 7% from previous report)
- Virginia: 41% of 32 stories (up 16% from previous report)
2) Discussion of the
Benefits of Clean Energy Improved Significantly in Virginia and Nevada, but
Plummeted in Ohio.
In the initial analysis,
Nevada papers largely failed to inform readers about the benefits of clean
energy - including job creation - but this follow-up study reveals significant
improvement there. However, once strong coverage in Ohio plummeted. The
following numbers indicate how often coverage of clean energy mentioned the
benefits - economic, public health, environmental or otherwise - of clean
energy:
- Nevada: 79% of 24 stories (up 44% from previous report)
- Colorado: 65% of 26 stories (down 21% from previous report)
- New Hampshire: 57% of 7 stories (down 16% from previous report)
- Pennsylvania: 68% of 19 stories (down 11% from previous report)
- Ohio: 20% of 15 stories (down 44% from previous report)
- Virginia: 79% of 29 stories (up from 29% from previous report)
3) The risks of dirty
energy are still frequently underreported, but Virginia papers showed great
improvement.
According to the EPA,
high levels of mercury emitted from coal-fired power plants can damage
developing nervous systems, putting women of childbearing age, unborn babies, and
young children at risk for nervous system damage that will impair their
development. Although it is a
critically important issue related to our energy choices, swing state
newspapers largely neglected to discuss these and other risks of dirty energy.
However, papers in several states did show modest improvement from the previous
period, especially Virginia.
This state-by-state
breakdown shows what percentage of stories mentioned the inherent risks of
dirty energy:
- Colorado: 46% of 50 stories (up 2% from previous report)
- New Hampshire: 14% of 7 stories (down 6% from previous report)
- Nevada: 17% of 36 stories (up 2% from previous report)
- Ohio: 44% of 36 stories (up 1% from previous report)
- Pennsylvania: 48% of 87 stories (up 4% from previous report)
- Virginia: 52% of 50 stories (up 14% from previous report)
4) Big Money Drowns Out
Public Opinion.
Post-election public opinion polling indicated that 71 percent of
swing state voters supported increased use of wind power and 78 percent
supported increased use of solar power. However, this broad public support for
clean energy rarely is discussed in the news and was particularly neglected in
swing state coverage as dirty energy money poured into the election.
The
breakdown showing the percentage of stories that included public opinion
information on energy policy is below:
- Colorado: 0% of 60 (down 13% from previous report)
- New Hampshire: 10% of 10 (down 1% from previous report)
- Nevada: 0% of 49 (down 3.4% from previous report)
- Ohio: 7% of 41 (up 5% from previous report)
- Pennsylvania: 3% of 76 (up 3% from previous report)
- Virginia: 0% of 62 (no change from previous report)