In a society as large and complex as that of the United States, people rely on mediated sources of information. As a result, the mass media hold influence over other institutions of society, such as families, the public education system, and politics. Media coverage of events and issues within these institutions can help to deconstruct or preserve the values, norms, and stereotypes that are used in navigating through society. This study analyzed a sample of newspaper articles covering candidates in races for the 2006 U.S. House of Representatives in an attempt to determine whether there are still distinct differences in the coverage men and women candidates receive. The findings suggest that while female candidates received more coverage, they were still being covered in such a way that disadvantaged them when compared to their male counterparts in terms of coverage that can help candidates establish their viability as potential office holders. In other words, the news media seem to be providing systematic assistance to male candidates in terms of information that aids them in establishing their viability with potential voters. The presence of both a male and a female candidate within the same article seemed to reduce differences in coverage across candidate gender, but women were consistently slightly less likely to receive quality newsprint coverage that would help them establish their credibility among voters when compared to men. Compared to coverage from earlier congressional races, progress has been made in terms of greater balance in the amount of coverage candidates received, but women are still at a disadvantage in terms of the quality of coverage they receive in areas most vital to establishing their viability as candidates for public office, such as coverage of their positions on the issues, their experience and qualifications/credentials, and their fundraising capabilities.