It's Easy to Jump Into Politics Coverage

The 2008 elections are still a year away, more or less, but journalists have been reporting on the candidates and the campaign trail for months now...and we haven't even gotten through the party nominations! I think it's amazing that people are tuning in to election coverage this early--a little ridculous, but cool if you're a fan of the democratic process and all--but obviously not EVERYONE is too wrapped up in election discussion quite yet. It seems that journalists recognize this, becuase they're making it very easy for the news audience to pick up on what's going on and has been going on with the election "story." How? By providing ample context whenever they introduce new news. I'll show you what I mean.

Take the rather specific election coverage category "Republicans and immigration."

The NY Times reported on the Republican debate in Florida on Sunday, where candidates discussed immigration in front of a largely pro-immigration audience. The story goes through the different candidates and relays what they said, but before the reporters discuss Mike Huckabee, there is a small, one-sentence paragraph that says:

"The sudden rise of Mike Huckabee, the former governor of Arkansas who was hardly considered a factor a month ago, has shaken up the race and thrust him into the center of controversies."

Now anyone who has been following the election even loosely knows who Mike Huckabee is. What this explanatory paragraph shows is that the Times reporters thought his amped-up presence in the race was new enough news that they should mention it for anyone who might not've been paying close enough attention.

Tom Tancredo is also given a little introduction: "One candidate, Tom Tancredo, who has based his campaign on heated rhetoric about illegal immigration, boycotted the debate..."

Apparently the reporters thought the important context was not only a) that Tancredo has a stern stance on immigration, but also that b) yes, he is a candidate. Poor Tom.

Well, maybe not "poor Tom"--he's not the only one being introduced, so to speak, to the public.

On Tuesday, CNN started an article about the Romney vs. Huckabee debate over illegal immigration with the words "Presidential hopeful Mitt Romney..." I may be looking at this a little too closely for my own good, but I just wonder: Why did CNN think it was important to tell me that Mitt Romney was a presidential hopeful? Just because it sounded nice, or because they actually thought I might not know?

The article goes on to tell me that: "Romney has taken a tough stance on illegal immigration during the campaign, saying he would strengthen border security and implement a system that would allow employers to verify whether a person can work legally in the U.S." Again, this just illustrates my point that appropriate context is crucial when covering election stories, especially. A discussion of Romney's past in regards to illegal immigration is a necessary component of this story.

My last example comes from blog coverage of the election -- a Huffington Post article on an anti-immigration activist who supports Huckabee:

"Huckabee has soared in the polls recently, jumping into the lead in Iowa where caucuses in less than a month launch the presidential nominating season."

Well this one's a two-fer, or three-fer depending on how picky you want to get. We are again told that Huckabee "has soared in the polls recently"; we are told that caucuses are held in Iowa, and we are told that they occur in less than a month. This context was important because the article discussed a new backer coming forward for Huckabee so close to the caucuses.

Context context context.

DISCLAIMER: THIS ARTICLE DISCUSSED THE IMPORTANCE OF CONTEXT IN ELECTION COVERAGE. I AM AWARE THAT CONTEXT IS IMPORTANT IN ALL STORIES. DUH. BUT I HAVE FOUND THAT REPORTERS COVERING THE ELECTION SEEM TO GIVE CONTEXT AT EVERY POSSIBLE POINT, EVEN WHEN I THINK THE INFORMATION THEY'RE GIVING ME COULD BE CONSIDERED GENERAL KNOWLEDGE. THAT HAS BEEN MY OBSERVATION OF A TREND IN ELECTION COVERAGE.