Washington Post ombudsman Deborah Howell has completed her analysis of her paper's campaign coverage and the numbers aren't good for those supporting the proposition that the media has been fair and balanced in its coverage of the 2008 presidential contest.

The numbers:

Stories about the candidates (since Nov. 11, 2007):

Obama: 946

McCain: 786

After the field was set with Obama's June 4 primary victories through election day:

Obama: 626

McCain: 584

Front page stories for the same period:

Obama: 176

McCain: 144

Both: 41

Photos (same period):

Obama: 311

Mccain: 282

Photos (Larger than 3 columns wide):

Obama: 133

McCain: 121

Photos (3 cols. or smaller):

Obama: 178

McCain: 161

Photos (black and white):

McCain: 149

Obama: 147

Howell notes that the disparity between the coverage of the two candidates did change after her analysis of a few months ago. Without that, the disparity would've been greater.

Post photo and news editors were surprised by my first count on Aug. 3, which showed a much wider disparity, and made a more conscious effort at balance afterward.

Aside from the numbers, there are some howlers in Howell's column too.

Bill Hamilton, assistant managing editor for politics, said, "There are a lot of things I wish we'd been able to do in covering this campaign, but we had to make choices about what we felt we were uniquely able to provide our audiences both in Washington and on the Web. I don't at all discount the importance of issues, but we had a larger purpose, to convey and explain a campaign that our own David Broder described as the most exciting he has ever covered, a narrative that unfolded until the very end. I think our staff rose to the occasion."

All sizzle and no steak. As Howell notes, there were 1,295 horse-race stories and 594 issue stories. But issues apparently aren't important when you've got someone as wonderful as Barack Obama running.

Some readers complain that coverage is too poll-driven. They're right, but it's not going to change. The Post's polling was on the mark, and in some cases ahead of the curve, in focusing on independent voters, racial attitudes, low-wage voters, the shift of African Americans' support from Clinton to Obama and the rising importance of economic issues.

How do poll results get "ahead of the curve?" There's only one way -- if you're pushing a storyline instead of reporting on what's happening.

Finally, there's some honesty.

But Obama deserved tougher scrutiny than he got, especially of his undergraduate years, his start in Chicago and his relationship with Antoin "Tony" Rezko, who was convicted this year of influence-peddling in Chicago. The Post did nothing on Obama's acknowledged drug use as a teenager.

And neither did any other newspaper. Those sorts of stories could've been damaging to Obama's candidacy, so they didn't get covered. Compare those omissions to the Post's full press coverage of Gov. Sarah Palin.

One gaping hole in coverage involved Joe Biden, Obama's running mate. When Gov. Sarah Palin was nominated for vice president, reporters were booking the next flight to Alaska. Some readers thought The Post went over Palin with a fine-tooth comb and neglected Biden. They are right; it was a serious omission. However, I do not agree with those readers who thought The Post did only hatchet jobs on her. There were several good stories on her, the best on page 1 by Sally Jenkins on how Palin grew up in Alaska.

No, they weren't all hatchet jobs, but some were. And the enthusiasm for the "new" candidate only seems to apply if they happen to be a Democrat.

Journalism. Wound. Self-inflicted.