Absolutely. Especially when it comes to the welfare of our country.
The President is a servant of the people and we should be informed on issues that effect our lives.
What good is a public servant if he is making unilateral decisions because of bias or popularity?
We need to be informed of events that shape our lives. If not, then we are no better that third world countries.
Yes, media coverage is important for a president as it helps them communicate with the public, shape their image, and influence policy discussions. Through media outlets, presidents can reach a larger audience, address important issues, and showcase their accomplishments to gain support and build political capital.
tHE EXECUTIVE BRANCH DOES BECAUSE THE PRESIDENT IS IN THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH AND HE RECIEVES MEDIA COVERAGE 24/7
Hardly, as the media is rarely or never unbiased in their coverage.
Because media coverage is free.
Media coverage of wars changed from Vietnam for better.
less people will want to play the sport if they will not get media coverage when they do
The answer is "Media Circus".
Because of coverage of the Vietnam War being displayed in the media, this lead to Anti-War movements thorughout the U.S.
Media coverage
Under President Reagan, the military operated, then notified the media (after the horse was out of the barn); for Operation Urgent Fury (1983) invasion of Grenada. Under President Bush Sr., the military placed the media into cells (groups) and controlled them from there; for Operations Desert Shield (1990) and Desert Storm (January & February 1991).
Different media outlets cover the news in different ways. All news is important, but campaign coverage is crucial because of its capacity to empower the electorate. It is impossible to report everything.
The two factors that determine media coverage of a campaign are: How candidates use their advertising budget and the "free" attention they get as news makers.
newspapers