Whenever a reporter estimates a crowd at a rally, I get a call, or many.
It happened Monday when Anthony Lonetree wrote that “more than 500 people” attended a rally of critics of the Profile of Learning at the State Capitol.
Denise Bergo was flabbergasted. She said the sponsor told the crowd there were 2,000 in attendance. She concurred, comparing the turnout to filling the Wayzata Middle School auditorium, “which holds 2,000,” rather than the sanctuary of her church, “which seats 500.”
How Lonetree said he went about estimating the crowd:
“The rally started at 2:30 p.m. I tried to count folks about five minutes beforehand. I counted out groups of 50 and came up with 250 to 300 people by the time the event started.
“The emcee came up to me during the speeches and told me that Capitol Security had said that there were about or at least 1,500 people there.
“I can’t recall if he said more than 1,500, but he definitely said 1,500.
“I’d noticed more people had arrived. For example, there were quite a few more people on the steps. Earlier, most of the people were on the street below.
“I figured the security folks were experienced at handling rallies and must have some systematic process by which they estimate crowd sizes.
“After the rally, however, I went to my office in the Capitol basement, passing a security woman on the way, and as I began typing in the 1,500 figure, I thought maybe I should have doublechecked the estimate with her. It was only then that I thought that the 1,500 could be high, based on my earlier count.
“When I asked her about the 1,500, her first words were, ‘Oh, no,’ not 1,500, maybe 500 people. After further questioning, she said it may have been 600 or 700. Therefore, using her observation, as well as my earlier estimate of 250 to 300 before the rally began, I decided to use ‘more than 500.’
“I felt it was fair to say the crowd had doubled.
“I think it’s important to give crowd counts at political events, but rallies pose difficult challenges. There are no seats or aisles that allow you to count in clusters. Your best hope, as I discovered before the event, is for people to stand in groups with some distance between them.”
Comment: Lonetree’s response reflects his dedication. But he shouldn’t have to spend an inordinate amount of time figuring crowd numbers when there are no turnstiles. Better that articles report “50 or less than a hundred,” “a few or several hundred,” or “a few or several thousand.”
Corporate P.R.
Katherine Meerse said the headline on reporter Robert Franklin’s April 28 story about Target Corp. ending its giving to Planned Parenthood was misleading.
It said, “Target Corp. ends giving to Planned Parenthood.”
She complained that “it implied it was a political decision, rather than part of a broader decision” about the company’s funding priorities. The company’s foundation cut off funding to Planned Parenthood in 1990, then reinstated it when abortion-rights groups complained. Since then abortion opponents have conducted a campaign of protest.
Comment: Franklin’s story appropriately reported why Target changed funding directions in early 2000 with the history of its Planned Parenthood relationship.
But the company at the time made no announcement of its policy change regarding Planned Parenthood. Franklin learned about it from a reader. It’s a quintessential case of how not to build credibility with the news media.
Home delivery
Readers often call ombudsmen with a delivery problem. Kathy Norton of the Poughkeepsie (N.Y.) Journal reported this one before transferring the caller to circulation:
“A man called pleading for his paper by the promised 6 a.m. delivery time. Without the paper, he said he cannot, to put it delicately, use the lavatory facilities.”
Criminal intent?
Robert I. Green spotted it on Friday’s sports cover: “Pulley helps players get shot at college.”
Rene Pulley organized a basketball event to give players a chance to be seen by college recruiters.
