<table> </table> The conventions aren&#8217;t even here yet, but chatter about how <em>The Kansas City Star </em>covers the presidential campaign is heating up at my lines. No two readers agree fully, but common themes are emerging.</p><p>Over the past week, several John McCain fans have charged that <em>The Star </em>has overplayed Barack Obama&#8217;s trip overseas, while ignoring McCain at home.</p><p>In print, the paper really hasn&#8217;t published very much about Obama&#8217;s tour, and the stories so far have been running next to similar-sized pieces about McCain&#8217;s campaign back home. This is a case where I think some readers are conflating coverage they&#8217;ve seen elsewhere &#8212; particularly the seemingly-omnipresent coverage on cable TV news &#8212; with what they&#8217;ve read in <em>The Star.</em></p><p>Quantifying &#8220;fair&#8221; in covering political campaigns is always extremely difficult. Journalists should always try to cover all sides with appropriate balance. When one candidate appears in the Kansas City area and editors decide to put him on Page A-1, they are aware that the other side will cry &#8220;foul&#8221; if their guy doesn&#8217;t get similar treatment next time he&#8217;s in town.</p><p>That&#8217;s basic fairness, but it also sometimes sets up its own inequity. Regardless of one&#8217;s feelings about Obama, the massive crowds he&#8217;s drawn at some international appearances have been impressive, possibly unprecedented. His supporters could make a compelling case that <em>The Star </em>has underplayed the story. More coverage would likely pique McCain enthusiasts. However, he&#8217;s spent his time in more ordinary campaign mode, speaking more about domestic policy. It&#8217;s not tit for tat.</p><p>One extremely upset reader Thursday morning had counted wire-service headlines rotating through the World page at KansasCity.com. He tabulated many more stories about Obama than McCain, deeming it evidence that <em>The Star </em>is showing bias.</p><p>Two problems here: First, that Web page, like many on KansasCity.com, simply aggregates wire stories as they filter in from a variety of news bureaus around the world, along with the international stories that appear in print in <em>The Star</em>. There is no single editor picking and choosing stories to display.</p><p>Second and most important: European bureaus in particular filed huge numbers of stories about the visit of the candidate for the party opposing a U.S. president who is deeply unpopular overseas. You can certainly argue that Europeans&#8217; zeal is out of proportion, but there&#8217;s no overseeing intelligence guiding the hand of the wire services.</p><p>The question, then, is whether <em>The Star </em>resists giving Obama the &#8220;rock star&#8221; treatment throughout the campaign. His and McCain&#8217;s approaches are vastly different &#8212; and ironically, journalists often report that McCain is more conversational and less programmed when speaking to them one-on-one.</p><p>But it&#8217;s always important to remember that coverage can&#8217;t be evaluated purely on a numerical scale. Column inches and counting photos is only part of the equation.