What studies have analyzed the New York Times' coverage of Donald Trump compared to other presidents?

1. What the New York Times itself says about its Trump coverage

The New York Times published an “Insider” piece answering readers’ questions about how it reports on Mr. Trump, acknowledging tensions readers feel—why the paper sometimes avoids labeling statements with words like “lies” or “propaganda,” and why subscribers want more separation or different language choices when covering the president ^[1]. That article frames the debate as editorial judgment about language and exposure, not as a formal comparative content analysis against past presidents ^[1].

2. Reporting that tracks NYT output but not cross‑presidential comparisons

The NYT maintains data‑heavy pages and trackers—approval‑rating charts, “First 100 days” trackers, and interactive timelines—that document the scale and intensity of coverage around Trump’s actions and statements ^{[4] [2]}. These tools show the volume of reporting on a sitting president but, in the pieces provided, they are framed as contemporaneous reporting resources rather than academic studies that systematically compare NYT coverage of Trump to coverage of other presidents ^{[4] [2]}.

3. Where academic or external media‑studies reporting could fit — and what’s missing

Several supplied sources are research organizations and media‑related studies (Pew Research Center, PRRI, Brookings), but their work in the results focuses on public opinion about Trump, polarization, and presidential assessments—not direct content analyses of NYT reporting across presidents ^{[3] [5] [6]}. For example, Pew publishes deep research on Trump’s approval and traits ^{[3] [7]}, while Brookings compares presidential evaluations historically ^[6]; neither source in the list is presented as a NYT‑vs‑NYT cross‑president coverage study. Thus, available sources do not document an external peer‑reviewed study directly measuring NYT tone/quantity for Trump versus prior presidents (not found in current reporting).

4. Related studies and proxies you can find in the supplied material

The supplied materials include media‑related findings and public‑opinion research that are useful proxies for thinking about coverage questions: Pew and PRRI polling document partisan splits in perceptions of Trump that can shape how audiences interpret news coverage ^{[3] [5]}. Northeastern research cited here examines news sources and the “news divide” among Trump voters, which helps explain differing audience reactions to NYT reporting even if it doesn’t quantify the paper’s bias ^[8]. These works help contextualize why debates over NYT coverage intensity and language are politically charged although they stop short of a direct content comparison ^{[8] [3]}.

5. What NYT readers and critics ask — the editorial debate

Readers and critics explicitly asked the NYT to alter phrasing and presentation about Trump (for example, to use stronger labels or to isolate Trump coverage), and Times editors responded publicly to some of those questions, revealing an internal recognition of audience concerns ^[1]. That exchange is evidence of controversy around coverage practice, but it is not a substitute for a systematic comparative study measuring relative negativity, framing, or story counts versus past presidents ^[1].

6. How to proceed if you want a rigorous comparison

To get the kind of study you asked about, look for two types of work not present in the supplied results: (a) academic content analyses that code headlines, frames, and valence across multiple presidents’ coverage in the NYT (peer‑reviewed journal articles or working papers), and (b) media‑watchdog reports that use automated sentiment analysis or human coding to compare story counts and tone. The current set of sources does not list such studies; you should search scholarly databases (JSTOR, Google Scholar), media studies journals, or organizations like the Pew Research Center’s journalism research team for a comparative NYT content analysis (not found in current reporting).

7. Bottom line for readers

The supplied reporting shows the NYT documents and defends its editorial choices and that public‑opinion researchers document strong polarization around Trump, which fuels disputes about media coverage ^{[1] [5]}. However, in this set of sources there is no explicit, cited academic or watchdog study that quantitatively compares New York Times coverage of Donald Trump with its coverage of other presidents; available sources do not mention such a study (not found in current reporting).