Readers hated “the jitter” with a fiery passion when first introduced in 2018, the Times gave readers the option to turn the jitter off - though it cautioned: “Switching it off only hides the uncertainty - it doesn’t make it go away.” Patience, please This year’s needle only moved with changing data, not to evoke the basic unknowability of the universe. This time, though, the Times didn’t build constant quivering into the needle, as it had in 2016. The fact that his needle has been all over the place tonight does not speak well to the needle metaphor as a good way to report out what is happening. But if that much meta-explanation is necessary, how useful is the needle to readers? Nate Cohn, a correspondent for The New York Times’ The Upshot, was giving insightful behind-the-scenes information and commentary on the needle’s performance throughout the night. If such models can’t be more predictive than raw results, I don’t see their point. The Needle goes from “Quite Likely” to “Probably” to “Leaning” Trump in #Georgia every 15ms or so. NYT needle for Georgia has flipped toward Biden, projecting 68% probability. It really did set the narrative but the NY Times reporters correctly told everyone to be patient and the needle wasn’t patient. It gave us no new info, it gave bad info, it updated in the middle of the nightĪnd then the 1 am update happened where it went from a certain Trump victory to this but I really didn’t see an update to the page. And those who stayed up late on Tuesday saw more of the windshield wiper-like wavering that made people crazy four years ago.Ĭan we just talk about how the NY Times needle was an unhelpful disaster last night? It literally learned none of the lessons that the news media side of the organization had been telling us or knew. Biden’s done there.īut the night was long. The CNN coverage of the Florida situation is terrible they keep emphasizing how close the statewide vote count is while ignoring the fact that none of the Panhandle is in yet. The needle - which we were told was “way smarter” than 2016’s iteration - did get some early, positive reviews, including when it was one of the first to report that Trump appeared to have sewn up Florida. October 24, 2018The Times led with the controversial visualization, encouraging readers to “bookmark the needle” even before pointing to their main results page. (The Times skipped a national needle this cycle, citing mail voting and the many different timetables and methods states had for counting ballots and reporting results this year.) There were three needles for the 2020 election cycle, representing live estimates for presidential race results in the battleground states of Florida, Georgia, and North Carolina. The New York Times’ angst-producing needle didn’t just return, it multiplied. But it certainly wasn’t a happy night for many viewers, readers, and obsessive doomscrollers. The added complexity of massive early voting and the still-fresh scars from 2016 generally led to outlets more willing to let the night develop. There weren’t a ton of meaningful innovations in last night’s media coverage - unless you count “caution” as an innovation, which maybe you should. As of Wednesday afternoon, no news organization has been able to declare an overall winner, and there are still meaningful votes left to count. The quadrennial media rituals - “too early to call,” a sudden awareness of the nation’s counties, Steve Kornacki - all returned for the 2020 presidential election. That was quite a ride, wasn’t it? Or, rather, this election is quite a ride, given that it’s still going on.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |