-Caveat Lector-
FAIR-L
Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting
Media analysis, critiques and news reports
Burying the Lead: Democracy Denied
by Jim Naureckas
November 15, 2001
In journalism, it's called "burying the lead": A story starts off with what
everyone already knows, while the real news-- the most surprising,
significant or never-been-told-before information-- gets pushed down where
people are less likely to see it.
That's what happened to the findings of the media study of the uncounted
votes from last year's Florida presidential vote. A consortium of news
outlets-- including The New York Times, The Washington Post, Tribune Co.
(Newsday's parent company), The Wall Street Journal, Associated Press and
CNN-- spent nearly a year and $900,000 reexamining every disputed ballot.
The consortium determined that if the U.S. Supreme Court had allowed the
ongoing recount to go through, George W. Bush would still likely have ended
up in the White House. That's because the recount ordered by the Florida
Supreme Court-- as well as the more limited recount asked for by Democratic
candidate Al Gore-- only involved so-called undervotes, ballots that when
counted mechanically registered no choice for president.
Gore and the Florida Supreme Court ignored overvotes-- votes where
mechanical counting registered more than one vote-- on the assumption that
there would be no way to tell which of the multiple candidates the voter
actually intended to pick.
But as the consortium found when it actually looked at the overvotes, one
often could tell what the voter's intent was. Many of the overvotes
involved, for example, a voter punching the hole next to a candidate's name,
and then writing in the same candidate's name.
Since the intent of the voter is clear, these are clearly valid votes under
Florida law. And Gore picked up enough of such votes that it almost didn't
matter what standard you used when looking at undervotes-- whether you
counted every dimple or insisted on a fully punched chad, the consortium
found that Gore ended up the winner of virtually any full reexamination of
rejected ballots.
So there are two main findings: The Supreme Court's intervention probably
did not affect the outcome of the limited recounts then under way, and more
people probably cast valid votes for Gore than for Bush.
If the first finding was the important news, the consortium was scooped long
ago: The Miami Herald and USA Today, working as a separate team, published
stories in April that argued persuasively that the particular recounts that
were halted by the Supreme Court probably would have produced a Bush
victory.
What's new is the finding that, since voters are supposed to decide
elections rather than lawyers or judges, the state's electoral votes appear
to have gone to the wrong candidate. Given that the outcome in Florida
determined the national victor, this is not just news but a critical
challenge to the legitimacy of the presidency.
So how did the media report the results of the ballot reexamination?
Overwhelmingly, they chose to lead with the news that was comfortable,
uncontroversial-- and seven months old. "In Election Review, Bush Wins
Without Supreme Court Help," was The Wall Street Journal's headline on its
story, paralleling The New York Times' "Study of Disputed Florida Ballots
Finds Justices Did Not Cast the Deciding Vote." That angle would be fine if
you believed that the Supreme Court was the most important aspect of the
story; but what about the presidency?
Other members of the consortium emphasized the most Bush-friendly aspects of
the story: "Bush Still Had Votes to Win in a Recount, Study Finds," was the
Tribune Co.'s Los Angeles Times' main headline on its report, matching The
Washington Post's "Florida Recounts Would Have Favored Bush" and CNN.com's
"Florida Recount Study: Bush Still Wins." The St. Petersburg Times' Web site
put it succinctly: "Recount: Bush." While some of these outlets tried to
convey greater complexity in subheads, all these headlines obscure the fact
that the outlets' most comprehensive recount put Gore ahead of Bush.
Emphasizing the old and conventional while playing down the new and
controversial is a recipe for being ignored, and sure enough, few outlets
that were not part of the consortium did much with the findings. A story
that may well be mentioned in high school history classes a hundred years
from now didn't even merit an editorial comment from most newspapers.
It's tempting to attribute this coyness to Sept. 11, and news outlets'
reluctance to undermine the legitimacy of the presidency when the country is
at war. But the coverage of the consortium's findings is similar to the way
earlier media recounts were handled; even the most preliminary Miami
Herald/USA Today ballot stories prompted "Bush Really Won" stories across
the country. Similarly, when Bush's inauguration was greeted by raucous
marchers contesting his victory, many outlets played down the significance
of the protests. The New York Times virtually ignored them.
War or no war, many journalists are instinctively protective of the
legitimacy of the institutions they cover. But the job of a journalist is
not to promote but to question. The theory behind the First Amendment is
that the system will be strengthened by an unflinching look at the system's
flaws. In looking back at the results of the Florida election, the media
flinched.
---
Jim Naureckas is the editor of Extra!, the magazine of the media watch group
FAIR. A version of this appeared in New York's Newsday (11/15/01).
----------
Feel free to respond to FAIR ( [EMAIL PROTECTED] ). We can't reply to
everything, but we will look at each message. We especially appreciate
documented example of media bias or censorship. And please send copies of
your email correspondence with media outlets, including any responses, to us
at: [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
FAIR ON THE AIR: FAIR's founder Jeff Cohen is a regular panelist on the Fox
News Channel's "Fox News Watch," which airs which airs Saturdays at 6:30 pm
and Sundays at 11 pm (Eastern Standard Time). Check your local listings.
FAIR produces CounterSpin, a weekly radio show heard on over 130 stations in
the U.S. and Canada. To find the CounterSpin station nearest you, visit
http://www.fair.org/counterspin/stations.html .
Please support FAIR by subscribing to our bimonthly magazine, Extra!
For more information, go to:
http://www.fair.org/extra/subscribe.html . Or call 1-800-847-3993.
FAIR's INTERNSHIP PROGRAM: FAIR accepts internship applications for its New
York office on a rolling basis. For more information, see:
http://www.fair.org/internships.html
You can subscribe to FAIR-L at our web site: http://www.fair.org , or by
sending a "subscribe FAIR-L enter your full name" command to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] . Our subscriber list is kept confidential.
You may leave the list at any time-- just send a message with "SIGNOFF
FAIR-L" in the body to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
FAIR
(212) 633-6700
http://www.fair.org/
E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
list administrators: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/";>www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
<A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html";>Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
<A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/";>ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
