Newspaper logo  
 
 
BURYING THE LEAD, Who really won in Florida?

THE STORY IS HIDDEN IN PLAIN VIEW:

BURYING THE LEAD
Who really won the Florida presidential election last November?

by Jim Naureckas
“Study of Disputed Florida Ballots Finds Justices Did Not Cast the Deciding Vote,” The New York Times headlined. 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?

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 (Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting). It is reprinted with permission. Email comments to fair@fair.org. See also: http://www.fair.org


Copyright © 2003 The Baltimore Chronicle and The Sentinel. All rights reserved. We invite your comments, criticisms and suggestions.

Republication or redistribution of Baltimore Chronicle and Sentinel content is expressly prohibited without their prior written consent.

This story was published on December 5, 2001.
  
Local Gov’t Stories, Events

Ref. : Civic Events

Ref. : Arts & Education Events

Ref. : Public Service Notices

Books, Films, Arts & Education

09.15 Missing aid millions deny Syrian kids education and fuel 'lost generation' fears

Letters

Ref. : Letters to the editor

Health Care & Environment

09.19 Canadian Doctor to U.S.: Try Single-Payer Health Care Instead Of Trashing It

09.18 China to buy $300 mn. in Lab-Grown Meat from Israel

09.18 Women of childbearing age around world suffering toxic levels of mercury

09.17 China to send over 100 pollution inspection teams to cities around Beijing

09.16 The Health Care Debate We’re Not Having [we need to fully expose and root-out America's profit-obsessed, mafia-like healthcare practices]

09.16 Conflicts and Climate Change Fueling Rise in World Hunger

09.16 Driving force: are electric cars crowding out traditional engines?

09.15 'Alarm bells we cannot ignore': world hunger rising for first time this century

09.15 California’s big battery experiment: a turning point for energy storage?

09.15 EU report on weedkiller safety copied text from Monsanto study

09.15 Half of Canada's monitored wildlife is in decline, major study finds [would the Koch brothers like to make a comment?]

09.14 On The Road To Extinction, Maybe It's Not All About Us [all of us—but especially oil & gas companies—need to know the harm and death we've caused to all life as we know it, and we must undo that damage]

09.14 The entrepreneurs turning carbon dioxide into fuels [end-products later burned and polluting aren't helpful]

News Media Matters

Daily: FAIR Blog
The Daily Howler

US Politics, Policy & 'Culture'

09.19 Single-Payer Movement Shows: Life After Trump May Not Suck

09.19 Gone Baby Gone

09.18 'Red Alert' Sounded: Trumpcare Is Back, More Brutal and Deadly Than Ever

09.16 Dawn of the Berniecratic Party

09.16 Sen. Warren Introduces Legislation to Save Consumers From 'Equifax Exploitation'

09.15 Why Bernie Sanders' Single-Payer Push Is Great Policy and Even Better Politics

09.15 Sen. Warren Rips Anthem for Sending 'Bigger Tax Cuts or Else' Ransom Note

09.13 Bernie Sanders unveils universal healthcare bill: 'We will win this struggle' [assuming typical cost-controls and efficiencies, ongoing total savings will be at least a $Trillion per year with government paying a larger portion of over-all costs]

Justice Matters

09.16 UK legal claims grow over exposure at work to toxic diesel fumes

09.15 'Inviting Bribes' as Legal Fees Soar, Trump Ethics Office Lifts Anonymous Gift Ban

High Crimes?

09.18 When Is a Genocide a Genocide?

09.17 The Forgotten Victims of Agent Orange [why was there no war crime trial and punishment for this?]

Economics, Crony Capitalism

09.18 GOVERNMENT BY GOLDMAN

09.18 The Growing Danger of Dynastic Wealth

09.18 College in the U.S. Is More Expensive Than in Any Other Country in the World [our 'mafia capitalism' is the best in the world!]

09.18 We need to make democracy work in the fight to save the planet

09.16 Capitalism and Poverty [as disemployment from automation and offshoring increases the population at risk of poverty will grow, so we'll have to help them or society will become more suicidal and violent]

09.15 Equifax Isn’t A Data Problem. It’s A Political Problem.

International & Futurism

09.18 The billionaires investing in Cyprus in exchange for EU passports

09.16 Alienation Is Killing Americans and Japanese

09.16 US foreign policy as bellicose as ever

09.15 Bill Gates: Don't expect charities to pick up the bill for Trump's sweeping aid cuts

09.15 The UN is failing – states must back off and give its leader the power to act

09.15 Migrants stuck on endless ferry journey as countries refuse entry [like the Jews on the Voyage of the St. Louis in 1939]

09.15 Moscow flaunts might against fading Isis as it alters balance of power in Syria [endless war cultivates a cavalier attitude]

09.15 Tillerson on North Korea: Russia and China must take 'direct action' over missile launch

We are a non-profit Internet-only newspaper publication founded in 1973. Your donation is essential to our survival.

You can also mail a check to:
Baltimore News Network, Inc.
P.O. Box 42581
Baltimore, MD 21284-2581
Google
This site Web

Public Service Ads: