| |||
|
Arts & Entertainment Books Comics Health & Body  MediaMothers Who Think News People Politics2000 Technology - Free Software Project Travel & Food  Columnists
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - Also Today For a full list of today's Salon Media stories, go to the
Media home page. - - - - - - - - - - - - Search Salon - - - - - - - - - - - - Salon Columnists - - - - - - - - - - - - Recently in Salon Media Column Media Media Media Media - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - |
Rushing to judgment
- - - - - - - - - - - -
March 8, 2000 | It's no secret that the information culled from these polls (the property of a consortium of TV networks and news organizations) is the special ingredient in TV election coverage. It's what makes all those newscasters look so smug before they predict a winner in a given race -- and what allows them to predict the winner with such confidence. It's what makes the Hottentots so hot. And Slate (which had published the results of the polls "decision records," i.e., whom those polled voted for, during the Michigan race) had copped the magic beans and there was a shit-storm of opinion in the press about it, pro and con. The Washington Post was of two minds: The paper's director of polling condemned the move as a blow against responsible journalism. "Common sense and pleas for restraint are no match for the anarchy of the Net in league with the arrogance of the media," he wrote of Slate's decision to run the exit polls before the voting polls had closed. A Post editorial cheered Slate on, saying there was no evidence that exit poll information affected the vote. Into the fray stepped National Review editor Rich Lowry, who threatened to share the exit poll data that Slate was scared off from running. The move brought a lot of visitors to the conservative magazine's Web site, all of whom left disappointed. "Because National Review is a nonprofit organization -- literally -- we don't have the resources to face down the fine gentlemen at Clifford Chance Rogers & Wells, who are bullying us on behalf of the Voter News Service into not delivering you the news," wrote Lowry. "As I write this at 2:50 p.m., I know who is very narrowly ahead in New York and is having a banner day overall. I know who is going to get a huge bounce from today and sweep through the Southern round of primaries next week. I know this because sources have told me. This is news. But I can't report it." Would it have made any difference if he had? The vast majority still get their election information from TV; the worst publishing exit poll data might do is force the networks to violate the gentlemen's agreement they've had not to spill those beans. (Everyone likes to recall the 1980 election, when Jimmy Carter conceded defeat before the West Coast polls were closed, based on what he had heard on television.) But as is, the anchors and reporters on the cable news channels gave the exit-polling fracas hardly a mention. They had won that particular battle and, like Al Gore and George Bush looking in their rear-view mirrors at the roadkill that had been Bill Bradley and John McCain, they were on to other things. At 6:12 p.m. EST, MSNBC's Andrea Mitchell tried to get California Rep. Chris Cox to admit that money is distorting the election process. Tough sell to a Bush man. "Democracy is a contact sport," he said. Nearly an hour before the first polls had closed, the Monday-morning quarterbacking had already begun -- even as a few McCain and Bradley supporters argued that it wasn't over yet. Sen Paul Wellstone, a Bradley supporter, said he didn't want to speak in the past tense but would like to wait until the votes were counted. Hold that thought while we rush to judgment ... In one of the most dramatic flourishes of the evening, Sen. John Kerry touted Gore as the king of campaign finance reform, a truly remarkable turnaround that, if successful, would make Bush's transformation into "A Reformer With Results" a mere parlor trick. | ||
 |
 |
 |
 |
Next page |