University of Michigan researcher Brian A. Patrick has compared news coverage in the elite media from 1990 to 1998 for five interest groups: the ACLU, NAACP, AARP, Handgun Control, Inc., and the National Rifle Association. Not surprisingly, by 16 objective measures the NRA garnered much more negative press coverage than all the other groups combined. Eighty-seven percent of editorials and op-ed pieces on the NRA were negative. NRA spokesmen were directly quoted far less in articles than spokesmen for the liberal groups, and were more often cited with loaded verbs like "contends," "asserts," or "argues," than with the neutral "says." The NRA was more than twice as likely as the liberal groups to be portrayed as a pernicious "lobby" or "special interest group," while the liberal organizations were more often innocuously labeled "citizens groups" or "advocacy groups." And headlines involving the NRA were twice as likely to include belittling jokes or puns (e.g., "Did NRA Shoot Itself in the Foot?").
The most interesting conclusion, keeping in mind as always with good social science that correlation is not causation, was this: The overwhelmingly negative coverage Patrick found actually went along with a dramatic boost in the NRA's membership. Indeed, the NRA tripled its membership during the period covered by the study. So, if the liberal media want to start spreading blame for the failure of post-Littleton gun control legislation, they should look in the mirror. This time, it looks like they're the ones who shot themselves in the foot.