Americans are following the presidential campaign more closely on nearly every news platform than they were earlier in the year.
Republicans express increasingly positive opinions about the presidential campaign and are now about as likely as Democrats to view the campaign as interesting and informative.
More than half of America watched the first presidential debate live, including 11% who were "dual screeners," following coverage on a computer or mobile device while also following television coverage.
As of late September, 88% of registered voters own a cell phone of some kind-and significant numbers of these voters are using their mobile devices to get information about the 2012 election, to interact with the campaigns, and to converse with other voters about political issues: 27% of registered voters who own a cell phone […]
Fully two-thirds of voters (67%) correctly identify Mitt Romney as the candidate who said 47% of the public is dependent on government and more than half of them (55%) have a negative reaction.
During what may prove a key period in the race for president, the candidates received very different treatment on Twitter, Facebook and blogs than in the mainstream media, a new PEJ study finds.
Nearly half (46%) say the coverage of Romney and Obama has been fair. Among those who see a bias, as many say the press has been too easy on Romney (20%) as too tough on him (21%), while nearly twice as many say press coverage of the president has been too easy (28%) than too tough (15%).
In the wake of the party conventions, Democrats express increasingly positive views of the presidential campaign.
Campaign and policy-related material on social networking sites plays a modest role in influencing most users’ views and political activities. Democrats and liberals are the most likely to say the sites have impact and are important and the politically engaged stand out in their use of the sites
The portrayal in the news media of the character and records of the two presidential contenders has been as negative as any campaign in recent times, and neither has enjoyed any advantage over the other. More of what the public hears about candidates also now comes from the campaigns themselves and less from journalists acting as independent reporters or interpreters of who the candidates are.