I grew worn down last week by the noise from both sides.
For weeks, I’ve tried to listen patiently as supporters of President Bush and Sen. John Kerry accused the newspaper of unbalanced coverage of the presidential campaign.
So I sought comfort in the safety and dispassion of numbers.
I tallied inches of text about each of the candidates, photographs of the candidates, their running mates and spouses, and arguments in favor and against each of the men.
What it all added up to was a balance sheet that showed no side with substantial advantage.
Despite the complaints of partisans from both sides, I found essentially balanced coverage of the two candidates. When editorial assistant Helen Shum and I measured the news coverage, we found it remarkably evenhanded at least in volume. For example, on a rudimentary measurement, the newspaper devoted the same amount of coverage to the stump speeches of Bush and Kerry and published their pictures roughly the same number of times.
I recognize that conclusion is relatively simplistic and runs counter to the impressions of hundreds and hundreds of readers on both sides, many of whom I’ve heard from. Their contrasting views are bolstered in a survey by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press that found 37 percent of voters polled believe coverage nationwide of Bush has been unfair, up from 25 percent at this stage four years ago. About 27 percent think it has been unfair to Kerry’s campaign, compared with 15 percent who thought that about Gore’s campaign. Clearly, there’s a bumper crop of mistrust.
What I believe is more illuminating than numbers in reviewing the coverage is gauging how well the newspaper delivered what readers said in February they wanted and needed in presidential coverage. Evaluating that provides insights, rather than the rhetoric of a seesaw debate over bias that hinges on your point of view.
Here’s what readers said they wanted us to do, and how I think The Oregonian fared in those categories since Labor Day:
Provide more issues coverage: By far, the newspaper focused the most on issues coverage. More than 1,250 inches of text — which translates with headlines, photos and graphics to roughly more than 20 pages — were devoted to stories specifically addressing issues. The newspaper devoted a majority of NewsFocus pages to illuminating the candidates’ stances on major issues, including national security, the war in Iraq, education and trade. Granted, the range of issues covered was relatively narrow, reflecting the relative narrowness of issues addressed by the campaigns. The voters guide published Oct. 17 displayed the broadest swath of issues, but the day-to-day coverage primarily was dictated by only those issues the candidates wanted to focus on.
Although issues coverage overwhelmed the reporting of who’s-ahead-today polls, those results still commanded substantial attention. The newspaper has tried to limit coverage of polling because it offers limited insight, but over the course of the campaign, it became a significant part of the coverage, especially because the race became a cliffhanger. By Thursday, polling stories had accounted for at least 350 inches, while stories about campaign tactics consumed more than 600 inches.
Bring more skepticism: The distortions by both candidates, frankly, could have prompted a story every day questioning their claims. But those stories appeared only occasionally, particularly when new ads emerged or in the aftermath of debates. The space devoted to what journalists call truth squadding was dwarfed by the coverage of stump speeches by more than a 2-to-1 ratio. The candidates obviously need to have their say, but they should be held accountable for everything they claim.
Tell the local impact of candidate stances: Only a limited sense of what a Bush or Kerry presidency would mean specifically for the Northwest emerged, despite an extensive but belated piece on the candidates’ stands on the environment last week, and several issue pieces by local reporters, including ones on education, health care, the environment and trade, many of which noted Oregon connections.
Reveal personal character: The stories revealing personal character were all but nonexistent after Labor Day. The newspaper offered extensive profiles during the candidates’ respective conventions, but no exhaustive profiles after Labor Day. Since then, a NewsFocus on faith and the candidates provided some revealing perspectives of Bush and Kerry, but little else conveyed a personal sense of the candidates.
Avoid meaningless flaps: After a summer dominated by coverage of a past war, the focus finally shifted to the current one. Yet even in September, the newspaper still devoted coverage to more records unveiled about Bush’s service, and coverage persisted over CBS’s relying on discredited documents; neither issue had much substance. Other flaps got limited attention. Kerry’s reference to Vice President Dick Cheney’s lesbian daughter obscured the issue of the candidates’ views of homosexuality. And descriptions of Bush’s smirks and demeanor during the first debate diverted attention from the substance of his remarks.
Allow for debate: Readers asked for expanded coverage of letters, and the newspaper partially delivered, especially at the end of the campaign. Yet given the volume of letters — a pace of more than 2,000 letters a week — the newspaper should consider expanding this further in coming elections.
Help us find the coverage: The launching of Campaign Central on Page A2 helped locate current and past coverage for readers, even though it was still in different parts of the paper. The Oregonian also recognized in print that it is not the sole source of campaign news for readers. Researchers provided readers with a wealth of Web sites and other information to help them become informed. Such information accounted for as much space as stories devoted to fact-checking.
Have some fun: I’m not sure that, given the partisan divide, anybody found much of anything funny about this campaign, although a few Living pieces attempted to do so. We’ve lost our sense of humor.
I know I have. I’m feeling bruised, numb from tallying stories for balance, and, of course, relieved as Tuesday approaches.
And thanks to the Classroom Law Project, I’m also feeling hope in youthful numbers.
I was inspired by the dozens of students from throughout the region who gathered at Portland State University on Thursday. The students came together not to rally for a cause or a candidate or a party.
They came together to explore a simple but essential question that journalists and readers reeling from this campaign should find comfort in: How could they become informed voters?
