The discussion was who got the most negative press. Trump got the most negative press.
Trump did get more free airtime and negative coverage than did Clinton.
I think the discussion was about the percentage of Trump's negative press coverage being greater than Clinton's. I haven't seen any study to substantiate that assertion. Mathematically it's something that could be ascertained, I haven't seen any verification of it.
What i've seen are studies showing that Trump receieved far more coverage than Clinton. A great deal of it negative because of Trump's inflammatory messages. I've seen a study that identified 8 'cloud' topics of Trump's, each of them generating negative press as Trump's message on these individual topics were negative. Clinton was found to have only one 'cloud' topic that generated negative press, and that was 'emails'.
As a result, Clinton received far less negative media coverage than Trump. precisely because her message was not negative on the 8 topics Trump used in his campaign.
Obviously the negative media coverage on the whole around one inflammatory topic, will be much less than the combined 8 inflammatory topics.
However, to state Trump received far more negative media coverage than Clinton conflates the subject of negative media coverage each candidate received during the election period.
It melds the issue of negative media coverage Trump received on 8 separate topics into one 'negative' whole. It doesn't distinguish the core issue of the subject of negative media coverage due to Trump's negative message on 8 topics, as opposed to Clinton's negative media coverage due to one single topic, her emails.
As I have said before, this political strategy is the brainchild of Trump's primary handler, Roger Stone. One of Stone's political rules that negative press coverage is better than no press coverage.
Roger Stone is an immoral, shady billionaire that had great aspirations to become President himself. After working behind the scenes in the Nixon re-election and Reagan election, Stone's immoral character was exposed by the press, ending any chance he had to become President. Conservative Republican's pushed him out of the public eye. It was during this time Stone set out to prove thr good character of a person was not necessary to elect a POTUS.
Stone believes and proved the only thing you need is a 'horse with stamina' (Trump), willing to follow his rules of infamy (outrageous assertions), and a 'politically unsophisticated' voter (Trump's base).
If you think I'm making this up, or that it's some 'libtard' propaganda, then you must do yourself a favor and watch Roger Stone's documentary 'Get Me Roger Stone', that he made explaining and bragging about his brilliant political strategy that elected your President.