A Critical Examination of the New York Times and Washington Post’s Coverage Leading up to the 2022 Midterm Elections
In the aftermath of the 2016 presidential election, much blame was placed on misinformation and “fake news” circulating on social media platforms. However, a group of researchers questioned whether traditional journalism outlets had been overlooked in the analysis. They embarked on a study to assess the coverage of the New York Times in the months leading up to the election and found a significant focus on horse race politics and personal scandals, rather than policy. Now, seven years later, the same researchers have revisited the topic, expanding their analysis to include the Washington Post. Their findings reveal a continued lack of emphasis on policy and a failure to address the criticisms of their editorial choices.
The Front Page’s Disproportionate Influence
The researchers recognized the significance of the front page in shaping readers’ perceptions, as it represents the articles that publishers deem most important. They analyzed the front-page coverage of the New York Times and the Washington Post from September 1, 2022, to Election Day in November. Their analysis also revealed that a significant portion of web browsing sessions starting from the Times homepage did not lead to other sections or articles, indicating that readers often stick to what they are initially shown.
Lack of Policy Insight
Both the New York Times and the Washington Post exhibited a lack of insight into domestic policy in their coverage. Instead, they focused on horse race politics and campaign palace intrigue, which served to entertain readers rather than educate them on the essential differences between political parties. The researchers found that only a small fraction of front-page articles delved into policy matters, with the New York Times giving more attention to subjects important to Republicans and the Washington Post focusing more on topics favored by Democrats.
Imbalance in Coverage
The researchers examined the topics that received the most coverage in both newspapers and found a significant disparity. Republican-favored topics accounted for a larger number of articles in the New York Times, while Democratic topics received less attention. The Washington Post displayed a more balanced showing in terms of coverage. In the final days leading up to the election, the New York Times particularly emphasized fear about the economy and crime, suggesting that these issues were historically bad and that Republicans had solutions to offer, despite data that refuted these premises.
Lack of Critical Self-Reflection
Despite the scrutiny faced by major news outlets after the 2016 election, the researchers found no evidence of critical self-reflection in the New York Times or other major papers. The outgoing editor at the time, Dean Baquet, defended the paper’s coverage of Clinton’s email server and dismissed criticism from Twitter. The leadership of these outlets seemed to view themselves as exhibiting objective judgment, but the researchers argue that news judgments are inherently subjective.
The Subjectivity of News Judgments
The researchers assert that claims to objectivity in journalism are a convenient fiction. News organizations choose which stories to tell, reflecting their subjective opinions and values. The New York Times, for example, heavily covered the Russian invasion of Ukraine but largely ignored policy implications of the midterm election on the war. The choices made by these outlets, while not necessarily wrong, have a significant impact on readers’ understanding of current events.
Conclusion:
The study conducted by these researchers highlights the continued failure of traditional journalism outlets to prioritize policy coverage and address criticisms of their editorial choices. The lack of emphasis on policy and the disproportionate focus on horse race politics and personal scandals contribute to a misinformed readership. While outlets should maintain a commitment to truth and accuracy, an earnest and transparent assessment of their coverage choices is necessary to ensure readers are well-informed. As the presidential race approaches, the influence of traditional journalism remains a critical factor in shaping public perception and understanding.
Leave a Reply