this tabloid style of media coverage... modern campaigns are exercises in image manipulation.... Elections decided on sound bites, negative campaign commercials, and sensationalised exposure of personal character flaws provide no meaningful direction for government." 2016 Studies have shown that all other 2016 candidates received vastly less media coverage than Donald Trump. Trump received more extensive media coverage than Ted Cruz, John Kasich, Hillary Clinton, and Bernie Sanders combined when they were the only primary candidates left in the race. The Democratic primary received substantially less coverage than the Republican primary. Sanders received the most positive coverage of any candidate overall, but his opponent in the Democratic primary, Hillary Clinton, received the most negative coverage. Among the general election candidates, Trump received inordinate amounts of coverage on his policies and issues and on his personal character and life, but Clinton's emails controversy was a dominant feature of her coverage and earned more media coverage than all of her policy positions combined. Foreign policy In addition to philosophical or economic biases, there are also subject biases, including criticism of media coverage about US foreign policy issues as being overly centered in Washington, DC. Coverage is variously cited as being "beltway centrism," framed in terms of domestic politics and established policy positions, following only Washington's 'Official Agendas', and mirroring only a "Washington Consensus." Regardless of the criticism, according to the Columbia Journalism Review, "No news subject generates more complaints about media objectivity than the Middle East in general and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in particular." Vietnam War Arab–Israeli conflict Stephen Zunes wrote that "mainstream and conservative Jewish organizations have mobilized considerable lobbying resources, financial contributions from the Jewish community, and citizen pressure on the news media and other forums of public discourse in support of the Israeli government." According to the professor of journalism Eric Alterman, debate among Middle East pundits "is dominated by people who cannot imagine criticizing Israel." In 2002, he listed 56 columnists and commentators who can be counted on to support Israel "reflexively and without qualification." Alterman identified only five pundits who consistently criticize Israeli behavior or endorse pro-Arab positions. Journalists described as pro-Israel by Mearsheimer and Walt include The New York Times William Safire, A.M. Rosenthal, David Brooks, and Thomas Friedman; The Washington Posts Jim Hoagland, Robert Kagan, Charles Krauthammer, and George Will; and the Los Angeles Times Max Boot, Jonah Goldberg, and Jonathan Chait. The 2007 book The