All Bad News: How Legacy Media Scored a 'Perfect 100' in Negativity

What Happened

A recent Media Research Center (MRC) study is sparking debate over how mainstream media covers the current administration. According to the report, major broadcast networks, ABC, CBS, and NBC, gave Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth zero positive coverage in the first 100 days of President Trump’s second term. Every story, segment, and mention was negative.

The study didn’t stop there. It found that Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. received 89% negative coverage. Elon Musk, in his role as adviser to the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), got 96% negative. President Trump himself was covered negatively 92% of the time during that same period.

In contrast, the MRC points out that President Joe Biden received 59% positive coverage during the early months of his first term. The data was compiled by analyzing evaluative statements made by reporters, anchors, and quoted experts between January 20 and April 9.

Pete Hegseth responded to the findings publicly, calling the 100% negative coverage a 'perfect score.' He argued that the media’s tone reflects politics more than his performance.

Why It Matters

The findings have drawn attention because 100% negative coverage is hard to justify under any administration. This is especially since there has been some level of public success. For example, Hegseth noted that military recruitment has seen record-high numbers under his leadership, a detail largely missing from national coverage.

Critical and objective reporting is essential in a healthy democracy. However, the numbers in the report raise concerns about whether networks are offering a critical balance or just consistent opposition.

When an administration is routinely framed in one dimension, in this case negative, it’s harder for the public to understand what’s actually working. When similar figures under previous administrations have received far more favorable coverage, questions about the consistency and objectivity of legacy media arise.

How It Affects Readers

To anyone who stays up to date with the news, this report matters. Legacy media coverage still shapes public opinion, even in an era dominated by social media and alternative news sources. When legacy outlets have the autonomy to filter what gets airplay or decide to frame every new development in a negative light, it can distort how issues are perceived and understood.

It also puts more pressure on the audience to cross-check information and seek out multiple sources. While that isn't necessarily a bad thing, the reasoning behind why is the issue. It also does shift far more responsibility on the individual to figure out what's fact or fiction.

The data from this study would suggest that media bias isn't just about editorializing. It's about patterns in which stories are chosen, how they're framed, and whether anything positive is allowed to be filtered through at all.

No administration should expect a free pass. But when none of the major broadcast networks offer a single positive report, it raises more than eyebrows. It suggests the media isn’t just skeptical, it’s settled into a posture of outright rejection.

For audiences trying to stay informed, that’s worth paying attention to. Not because you need to agree with Pete Hegseth, Trump, or anyone else involved, but because balanced coverage should be the baseline, not the exception.