Yes...
but fairness isn't just quantitative. In other words, I want a media that will criticize what *needs* to be criticized and that applauds what deserves applause. "Fair and balanced" media isn't about an equal number of positive/negative stories, but about a media that can dig into the stories, fact check, and report back accordingly.

It looks like 15% of coverage of McCain comes from Fox News.

I checked Pew, and they said what I was going to say, but I'll say it anyway. With so much press coverage focused on who's winning, the better the candidate does, the more positive the coverage. As McCain slipped in the polls, especially after his strange reaction to the economic crisis, stories were about "what's wrong with the McCain campaign?" The cover story in today's NY Times Magazine is a recent and long example. In the debates, the media observers called them even, but then when the polls showed that viewers thought Obama did better, stories tried to explain what was wrong with McCain's performance. Palin keeps alienating all but the hard core, so stories about McCain's choosing her have to question his judgment.