Second MMU report says trends continue in media houses

Apr 24, 2015 News

---

As the Media Monitoring Unit (MMU) continues to observe media houses in Guyana in the lead-up to general and regional elections, trends previously witnessed, including positive coverage for the PPP/C from the state media, persist.
The second report, which was released on Wednesday, covered the period of April 1 until Nomination Day on April 7.
The report, which currently covers the Government, the PPP/C and APNU+AFC, explained that its next report will cover all of the parties which are slated to compete at the upcoming elections.
In regards to Guyana’s newspapers, the continuing trends were most notable. The newspapers which came under review from the MMU were Stabroek News, Kaieteur News, Guyana Times, and the Guyana Chronicle.
For the one-week period, the MMU report showed that the incumbent PPP/C and the Government received high levels of positive coverage from the Guyana Chronicle and Guyana Times while the opposition coalition APNU+AFC received more favour from the Kaieteur News. The Stabroek was the most “middle of the fence” newspaper under surveillance.
According to the MMU, its second report focused on editorials, letters, columns, general news and cartoons. The report also looked at the positive, negative and neutral coverage the three entities received.
In the Guyana Chronicle, the APNU+AFC received less positive coverage in all of the sections under review. Of note under the editorial section, the PPP/C’s positive coverage outdistanced APNU+AFC’s coverage by almost 5:1. The report added that the PPP/C came in for “a small serving of negative publicity”. This was in stark contrast to the APNU+AFC’s publicity; the opposition’s negative coverage overwhelmed the PPP/C’s negative coverage by a margin of 15:1.
Also, in the general news section, the positive coverage that the PPP/C received was five times more than what APNU+AFC received. Further, the Government’s positive coverage was four times that of APNU+AFC’s.
“Altogether, the Government and the PPP/C gained considerable net positive coverage, while the APNU+AFC ended up with net negative coverage,” the report said.
Similarly, with the Guyana Times, the MMU reported that the Government and the PPP/C gained net positive coverage while the APNU+AFC accumulated net negative coverage.
Particularly in the general news section of the newspaper, great disparity was shown in the coverage of the Government, the PPP/C, and the APNU+AFC coalition. The report said that all three entities received copious amounts of positive publicity, with the Government attracting the most, followed by APNU+AFC then the PPP/C. However, APNU+AFC’s allotment of negative coverage was nearly 43 times the combined negative coverage calculated for the Government and the PPP/C.
With the Stabroek News, while some sections favoured the coalition, others favoured the Government and the PPP/C.
In the editorial category, the views expressed measured modest amounts of negative publicity which were accredited to the Government and the PPP/C, and a small amount of same directed to the APNU+AFC.
Comparatively, the Government received approximately the same amount of negative publicity calculated for the PPP/C and APNU+AFC, combined. Separately, the Government’s negative coverage was roughly four times APNU+AFC’s negative coverage, while the PPP/C’s negative coverage was nearly three times the negative coverage absorbed by APNU+AFC.
In the letters category, the Government and the PPP/C came away with modest amounts of positive publicity and the APNU+AFC gained a relatively large amount of positive coverage while the views expressed in the newspaper’s columns provided the Government with a large amount of positive coverage, the PPP/C with a relatively tiny amount of same, and the APNU+AFC with a modest amount.
Furthermore, from the general news section of the newspaper, the Government actually gained the highest amount of positive coverage, closely followed by the APNU+AFC, then the PPP/C. On the negative side, the Government and the PPP/C were the recipients of considerable amounts of negative coverage, while the APNU+AFC only came in for a relatively minuscule amount of same.
“Comparatively, the Government received a positive to negative ratio of coverage of nearly 3:1; the PPP/C’s positive to negative ratio was approximately 2:1; and APNU+AFC’s ratio along the same contrasting lines of coverage was 43:1,” the report said.
The cartoons published in the newspaper over the duration of this reporting period were also moderately negative of the Government, and largely negative of the Coalition, APNU+AFC.
With the final newspaper under review, the Kaieteur News, the MMU report showed that the Government and the PPP/C were the recipients of the most negative coverage.
Particularly in the columns and general news sections, the APNU+AFC received more positive coverage.
In the columns section, the MMU report said, “Comparatively, the Government’s negative coverage was nearly double the same coverage calculated for APNU+AFC, while the PPP/C’s negative coverage was 8 times the Government’s share and 15 times the APNU+AFC’s.”
In the General News section, all three entities gained large amounts of positive publicity, with the APNU+AFC gaining the most, followed by the PPP/C, then the Government. The APNU+AFC’s positive coverage was double that of the PPP/C, and triple that of the Government. On the negative side, the Government, the PPP/C, and APNU+AFC, all gained large dosages of negative publicity, with the PPP/C taking in the most, followed by the Government, then APNU+AFC, in that order.
Comparatively, the PPP/C’s negative coverage was three times the APNU+AFC’s. Altogether, the Government and the PPP/C were the recipients of varying levels of net negative publicity, while the APNU+AFC gained net positive coverage.

---

---