Moving Beyond Horse Race Coverage: How to Foster Informed Elections
As election season approaches in the United States (in a manner similar to which Jaws approaches unsuspecting swimmers), the media continues to find itself trapped in the enticing allure of “horse race coverage,” where polling data takes center stage and overshadows the nuanced aspects of politics. This approach, reminiscent of a horse race, not only erodes trust in politicians and the media but also leaves the audience less informed, dampens the prospects of underrepresented candidates and parties, and even favors unconventional, yet not necessarily optimal, candidates. Further yet, it sets the stage for upsets that greatly shake public confidence in democracy—as happened following both the 2016 and 2020 U.S. presidential Elections. To fortify our democracy, it is crucial to steer clear of this simplistic approach and embrace a more substantive and informative style of election coverage.
Americans are already experiencing the repercussions of horse race coverage. Americans have lost faith in U.S. institutions at alarming rates in the past 10 years. That’s because horse race coverage undermines trust in the political process by reducing elections to mere competitions, where the emphasis is on who's leading, who's trailing, and who might be the dark horse. This focus on the “game” rather than the substance of politics can disengage voters and diminish their incentive to participate. When the narrative primarily revolves around who's ahead, voters are denied the comprehensive information they need to make informed choices—leading to demagogues, like former President Donald Trump, seizing opportunities for power.
Journalists must provide more substantial and context-rich reporting. They should delve into candidates' proposed policies, party support, and the feasibility of their plans. While this sounds ideal, the complexity in diverting from horse race coverage comes from the audience’s willing participation in it. Politics, when portrayed like a competitive sport, becomes more captivating. This compromises depth and accuracy and turns politics into a popularity contest akin to running for high school class president, increasing the potential for bad actors to put their ulterior motives in play using government institutions while the public remains blind to the corruption.
Meanwhile, horse race coverage is alluring to journalists because it makes politics engaging without the journalist doing more work. However, policy and intimate details of politics are not inherently boring, and journalists have a duty to make them engaging. Polls are valuable—but journalists reporting on poll data alone are adding to the problem. To enhance coverage and provide context for polls, journalists can explore deeper issues: asking candidates questions like who has raised the most campaign funds, how they are allocating those funds, and which influential groups support them can offer valuable insights into their viability and priorities. Furthermore, journalists must critically scrutinize polls. This entails examining the reputation of the polling organization, assessing sample size, margin of error, and survey methodology. Understanding the phrasing, order, and context of the questions being asked is crucial. Consulting with statistical experts can help in deciphering the reliability of the polls.
Journalists must answer questions that matter to their audience. Instead of regurgitating vague campaign slogans or playing up false claims made on the campaign trail, their mission is to grasp the nuances of candidates' proposals and present them in a way that makes sense to the average person. How do the candidates' stances on issues like healthcare, education, and taxes impact “John Q. Public”? What can voters expect for their children's future?
The U.S. is seeing the consequences of horse race coverage in real time. By simplifying complex political issues, eroding trust in the political process, and discouraging voter participation, the country witnessed a demagogue rise to power and undermine several crucial institutions. But the writing already seems to be on the wall for 2024: sites like FiveThirtyEight have put an overwhelming focus on polling numbers and forecasting competition in the 2024 presidential elections. Will our nation learn from its mistakes or are we doomed to repeat a turbulent period in our political history?
