Writing from the Center: The New York Times and the Florida Election Dispute :: Essays Papers

Writing from the Center: The New York Times and the Florida Election Dispute The result of the 2000 Presidential election was one of the most closely contested elections in our nation’s history. Soon after the polls closed, it became apparent that the final tally between the Democratic candidate Al Gore and the Republican candidate George W. Bush would be extremely close. Network news programs broadcast on election night well into the next morning as one candidate, then the other, seemed to gain the advantage. As the election results became more distinct, however, attention turned to Florida, where less than one thousand votes separated the candidates, with Bush enjoying a tenuous lead. Over the next few weeks the Florida election dispute went through several Byzantine twists and turns, with the Gore team pushing for—and in some cases getting—recounts of Gore‑friendly counties, and the Bush forces feverishly working to declare the whole matter settled and Bush the new President of the United States. Finally, in early December, the matter went to the United States Supreme Court. The Court decided in Bush v. Gore that there were insufficient grounds for continuing the recount process and in effect declared Bush the next President. The mainstream media—including The New York Times—were fixated with the entire electoral drama, with the story usually given the lead slot on the evening news or the front page of the newspaper. Yet after the Court handed down its decision, this coverage virtually ceased except for a cursory analysis of the Court’s decision. There was little attempt to question the basis of the Court’s ruling, or whether Gore would have had sufficient votes to achieve victory had a recount been allowed to proceed. Why? The answer, it seems, lies in the â€Å"centrist† bias of The New York Times. Jeff Cohen, the executive director of Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting has argued that mainstream media outlets such as The New York Times emphasize â€Å"syst em supporting news† that focuses on how well â€Å"the system works† in resolving difficult situations, rather than questioning the wisdom of the system itself.1 By comparing how the Times portrayed the aftermath of the Court decision with the coverage given by media outlets on the left (The Nation, Extra!) and outlets on the right (The National Review) we will be able to see the â€Å"centrist† bias of the Times and its editorial mandate to preserve the authority and status of â€Å"the system.