home

How the Media Flunked in New Hampshire

By Jeralyn, Section Media
Posted on Wed Jan 16, 2008 at 08:02:20 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

It wasn't just the pollsters that blew New Hampshire. Eric Boehlert explains how the media did an equally dismal job.

After providing plentiful examples, Boehlert says:

In today's campaign coverage, what journalists think about unfolding events takes precedence over what voters think. Voters have become essentially secondary, props in the background that are occasionally queried for a color quote. And that's a big reason why the press missed the New Hampshire story -- that, and the fact that the press was so anxious to write Clinton off as "toast."

Read the whole thing. And keep it in mind as you read continuing mainstream media reporting on the presidential race.

< Ike Turner Autopsy: Cocaine Overdose? | Charges of Union Intimidation in Nevada >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    How the Media Flunked in New Hampshire | 10 comments (10 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    Maybe pollsters had it right & Diebold wrong (none / 0) (#1)
    by Aaron on Wed Jan 16, 2008 at 09:42:32 PM EST
    Perhaps the media and the polls were correct, and it was the Diebold machines and electronic voting which fabricated an upset Clinton victory, not the people of New Hampshire.

    "The Diebold Effect": Hillary's Votes Higher From Diebold Machines Even Controlling for Demographics (education, income, population, etc)

    [In contrast to pre-election polls, the final vote tally from the NH democratic primary shows a surprise victory for Hillary Clinton. People quickly noticed an anomaly in the voting tallies which seemed to show an advantage to Hillary conferred by the use of Diebold machines.]  
    We'll find out (none / 0) (#2)
    by RalphB on Wed Jan 16, 2008 at 10:06:48 PM EST
    when the recount is finished.  But I don't expect that to make any difference to you.

    Parent
    Aaron (none / 0) (#3)
    by ConcordiaDem on Thu Jan 17, 2008 at 01:50:23 AM EST
    you truly can't think that their is a huge Clinton-Diebold conspiracy set to keep Barack, Or Kucinich down... come on... Hillary won in a completely feasible manner

    No I don't (none / 0) (#4)
    by Aaron on Thu Jan 17, 2008 at 03:44:29 AM EST
    I believe New Hampshire was likely fare, but once again these voting machines are creating controversy, and if you read the article, which has links to a ton of organizations looking into the issue, there are definitely questions worth exploring.

    These things should not be happening now, and I do have doubts about the validity of our voting process, whether the outcome can be changed through manipulation.

    It's the kind of thing that can't possibly happen in Iowa, or in a system that is much simpler.  I want to be able to count every vote, and I want to be able to verify the validity of those votes.  I don't think that's too much to ask since the People's sovereignty is on the line.

    There should be one type of voting machine used throughout the nation, and the federal government should pick up the cost of supplying these machines to every state in the union.  And each of these machines should have a duel paper record, one for the voter, and one to be counted by the precincts for verification purposes against the electronic record.

    This is not rocket science, this is simple counting, so why can't the United States of America get it right?

    Parent

    Voting Machines (none / 0) (#5)
    by BDB on Thu Jan 17, 2008 at 11:47:59 AM EST
    I share concerns about voting machines, but I think there's a real problem when folks use this explanation every time there's an election result they don't like.

    The exit polls by and large matched the vote.  There is no reason to believe that the count was wrong.  (Not that I object to a recount on this ground, have at it so long as I don't have to do it or pay for it.)

    But what's going to happen in NH is that the vote will be confirmed.  And that will happen again and again when folks insist on a conspiracy theory with no factual basis other than a hatred of Diebold machines.

    The result will be a number of recounts that affirm the machines' reliability and so the next time there is an election where the results really don't seem to make sense, nobody is going to listen to the complaints.  They're going to say, that's what they said about New Hampshire.  Because folks have cried wolf once to often.  

    And I say that as someone who is still angry at the Democrats for not doing enough to fix this entire voting mess after Florida in 2000.  There's simply no excuse for there being any issue in Ohio in 2004 after Florida in 2000.  

    Parent

    i agree with most of this (none / 0) (#6)
    by Judith on Thu Jan 17, 2008 at 11:52:32 AM EST
    but if the Dems were out of power what exactly do you think could have been done about it?  They were outnumbered bigtime.  I am really asking you - not because I disagree but because I really would like to know what you think -

    Parent
    Fight, Fight, Fight (none / 0) (#7)
    by BDB on Thu Jan 17, 2008 at 12:54:05 PM EST
    That's what the Democrats could've done.  I think most Americans were pretty embarrassed by the spectacle that was Florida, but the Dems didn't keep hammering it.  They agreed to some fixes with Republicans, in the name of bipartisanship I'm sure, and then let the matter drop.

    They did it again in Ohio.  

    They have controlled the Congress now for more than a year and we have another presidential election coming up in 2008, did they do anything over the last year - other than move the horrible FEC appointee Van Whateverhisname is through committee (and props to Obama for putting a hold on that one!) - to try to make sure we don't have a Florida or Ohio again?

    And look at the admission of vote caging in Missouri(?) and phone jamming in NH and the general civil rights section mess - there has been way too little outrage over this, IMO, by Democratic congressmen.  The presidential candidates can't do much for fear of lookiing like sore losers, but why don't their congressional colleagues get their backs and their own backs since a lot of voter supression efforts are in Congressional districts.  But they seem content not to make too many waves about the GOP's efforts to disenfranchise voters.  

    I honestly don't understand why.  I honestly think that most people who are just voters and do not work in the political system are all for fair and honest voting and vote counting.  The Democrats, who have been the most victimized in this area, too often give the political ground on this to Republicans with their voter fraud talk.

    Although why this issue should be any different than any other one (Iraq, the economy, etc.), I don't know.  It's just depressing as all get out.

    Parent

    fight (none / 0) (#8)
    by Judith on Thu Jan 17, 2008 at 01:16:19 PM EST
    is a meaningless term.  I was hoping (another meaningless term) you had something concrete to offer.

    Parent
    Concrete Idea (none / 0) (#9)
    by BDB on Thu Jan 17, 2008 at 02:58:38 PM EST
    Well, I have lots of concrete ideas like ensuring everyone has similar equipment, setting certain standards for ballots, paper trails for voting machines, strenghening voting rights section at the DOJ, etc.

    But none of that matters if the Democrats aren't willing to push the issue.  If they aren't willing to lay the ground work by raising the issue and framing it and then doing it again and again.  We're probably too far into the 08 election cycle now, but in January 2007 they could've drafted and moved through legislation for a bunch of this stuff and, if Bush vetoed it, raised holy heck.  

    But they don't do that.  

    Parent

    Okay (none / 0) (#10)
    by Judith on Thu Jan 17, 2008 at 03:58:27 PM EST
    but fight how?  What should they have done in the past? There were few of them in power.

     

    Parent

    How the Media Flunked in New Hampshire | 10 comments (10 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment