Changes in Media Polling in Recent Presidential Campaigns: Moving from Good to “Average” at CNN

Abstract

Political coverage generally, and campaign coverage in particular, form a central part of the news in the United States. One reason is the important role of elections in our democratic system of governance, a combination of our belief in the representation function of elections and that the outcomes make a difference in which policies are pursued and implemented. Just as importantly, the coverage of elections has many features that appeal to journalists and editors. Elections occur on a fixed schedule, known well in advance; this enables planning for the allocation of resources to the coverage. They involve conflict between the competing campaigns, another highly valued element of newsworthiness. They have events and circumstances that change everyday. They have a relatively orderly progression to a definitive conclusion on Election Day so the coverage is bounded and focused on the outcome; and there is a clear winner and loser at the end, even though in the cases of Bush v. Gore or Coleman versus Franken it may take an unusually long period of time and legal activity in order to determine the actual winner. And the campaigns are populated by relatively willing sources who are happy to be quoted, on or off the record as the situation warrants. So there is a commonly understood narrative that allows news organizations to produce content in a relatively condensed form that is easily understood by their audience members. And the coverage can be produced economically and on schedule, with generally good planning of both the coverage and the allocation of necessary resources.