In todayâ€™s world, the media has become one of the most important sourcesrnof information on candidates running for office in an election. Along withrnthat, the media has been thoroughly studied in order to assess how fairrnand balanced their coverage of candidates and political parties werernduring the run up to election. In this content analysis study of fairness andrnbalance in election stories, the two newspapers (Addis Zemen and thernReporter) coverage of the May 2005 election in Ethiopia were considerablyrnunfair and imbalanced in the space, prominence and visibility given torncandidates and political parties running for seat in the government. Ofrncourse, readers have only one in six chance of encountering a story that isrnboth fair and balanced in the two newspapers. This study also found outrnthat stories covering the 2005 Ethiopian election in these newspapers to bernmuch more imbalanced than balanced in both partisan and structuralrndimensions according to measures applied in the study. Hence, while thernproportion of stories in the Addis Zemen newspaper favoring EPRDFrncandidates were noticeably higher than other contestants, the CUDrncoalition party and its candidates received much more attention than theirrncounterparts in the Reporter newspaper. Moreover, individual stories inrnthe two sample newspapers are constructed to give a great deal ofrnattention (in terms of space, prominence and visibility) to one candidaternand/or political party than other opponents. Accordingly, approximatelyrnequal proportions (83% in Addis Zemen and 85% in the Reporterrnnewspaper) of the stories in both newspapers are imbalanced by one up tornfour component measures. Overall, this study suggests that there is a lotrnthat has to be done to achieve the standards of fairness and balance inrnboth the Addis Zemen and the Reporter newspaper.