Why Oh Why Can't We Have a Better Press Corps?

This morning's New York Times death spiral watch:

John M. Broder and Adam Nagourney: Obama and Huckabee Win in Iowa Vote: Senator Barack Obama won the Iowa Democratic caucuses tonight in a stunning show of strength by a young African-American candidate who was virtually unknown to America three years ago. He defeated Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, the former first lady, and former Senator John Edwards, the Democrats’ vice presidential nominee in 2004 by a substantial margin.

On the Republican side, Mike Huckabee, the folksy former Arkansas governor and Southern Baptist preacher, defeated the vastly better funded and organized Mitt Romney of Massachusetts, riding a wave of support by evangelical Christians who said they were drawn to Mr. Huckabee because they believed he shared their values.

The Iowa caucuses drew intense public interest and record turnout on the Democratic side, which featured three compelling candidates waging a fierce campaign that turned on the question of change versus experience. Democratic caucusgoers strongly endorsed Mr. Obama’s vow to change the nature of politics in Washington, decisively preferring his case to Mrs. Clinton’s emphasis on her experience in public life as a senator and the spouse of a president and a governor.

Notice: we are three paragraphs into the story and not a single piece of news except that Obama and Huckabee "won". No numbers about how many people attended the caucuses. No numbers about how Iowans are and are not representative of the nation. No numbers about how caucus goers are or are not representative of party activists, party members, or the overall population.

I would call this "horse-race journalism," but the first words out of any horse-race journalist's mouth are always something like:

War Admiral by two lengths over Scintillator at five furlongs.

I won't insult horse-race journalists.

Broder and Nagourney continue, giving as little information as possible:

Mr. Romney conceded early in the evening after falling more than 10 percentage points behind Mr. Huckabee. Mr. Romney, who outspent Mr. Huckabee by more than four to one, conceded in an interview on Fox News. “Congratulations on the first round to Mike,” he said. But he described Iowa as the first inning of a “50-inning ballgame.”... Mr. Romney sought to frame his defeat as something of a comeback, saying he had trailed Mr. Huckabee by more than 20 points a few weeks ago.... The crowd at Huckabee headquarters was ebullient....

In a caucus at the Plymouth Congregational Church in Des Moines, a record 454 Democrats appeared. The enthusiastic crowd heavily favored Senator Barack Obama of Illinois. Jon Muller, 42, the chief financial officer of an education nonprofit group, was one of the Obama backers. “One of the charges against Iowa is that we don’t really represent the rest of the country,” he said, alluding to the fact that blacks form less than three percent of the caucus participants. “Here’s a chance to make a statement about the inclusiveness of Iowa.”

A sample of early arrivals at the Democratic caucus sites told interviewers that the war in Iraq was the most important issue facing the country, followed closely by the economy and health care. A slim majority of the sample of Democratic caucusgoers said that they were looking for a candidate who could bring about needed change, while only one in five cited experience as the most important.... Those who cited health care as the top issue tended to support Mrs. Clinton, who also attracted strong support from older voters and women. Those who decided whom to support in the last three days tended to back former Mr. Edwards.

And, of course, without numbers of any kind, we have no idea what words like "tended" might mean. Then, finally, we get some numbers:

About a third of Republicans interviewed before they cast their votes cited illegal immigration as the most important issue.... followed by the economy and terrorism. The Republican sample included nearly 60 percent who identified themselves as evangelical Christians, who expressed support for Mr. Huckabee by a two-to-one margin over Mr. Romney. Those who make up their minds in the past three days tended to support Mr. Romney.

"Tended," again. I'll cut it off there, because then the canned blather begins.

Shame on John M. Broder, Adam Nagourney, Julie Bosman in Fort Madison, Cate Doty in Waterloo, Patrick Healy in Cedar Rapids, David D. Kirkpatrick in Fort Dodge, Michael Luo in Bettendorf, and Marc Santora in Derry, N.H. They know damned well they should do a lot better. They just choose not to.

Comments

[Bernard Yomtov]

"About a third of Republicans interviewed before they cast their votes cited illegal immigration as the most important issue."

The most important issue???? They're smoking something stronger than corn silk.

[Uncle Jeffy]

I'm trying to remember the last time that I thought David Broder had any relevance whatsoever - but it's just not coming to me...

[Craig Nelson]

I don't know why people read AdNags when they could get more incisive election analysis from Jon Swift and be much less aggravated. If a good rage is required and there's not a presidential news conference, there's a classic David Addington profile in the New Yorker -- always works for me.

And I doubt that any of the xenophobes are smoking much ditch weed.

[bigTom]

What should the press give numbers, -they are mathematically challenged (to put it politely).

Bernard, while for those of us who actually study the issue barely think about immigration, it has become a prime motivator (scapegoat?) for a significant chunk of the population.

In any case the election news will be drowned out by the latest Britney Spears blowup.

[kharris]

Bernard,

Caucus voters are special people. Many show up because they have something stuck in the craw. That's the way it is with the politically active. The bunch in question simply has immigrants stuck in their craw. You can bet another bunch had Iraq stuck in its craw, but they may not have shown up for the GOP gatherings.

[John Emerson]

We can't have a better New York Times because Pinch Sulzberger, who owns and operates the Times, prefers crappy reporting. This has been #572 of Simple Answers to Simple Questions About The New York Times.

(I have produced an almost identical series about the Washington Post.)

Only conservatives can get themselves an editorial page job by threatening and abusing their future employer the way Kristol did. Give it up, Brad! It's hopeless.

As far as I'm concerned, you're a conservative! But Graham and Sulzberger don't listen to me. The motherfuckers.

[John Emerson]

Caucus participation in Iowa was pretty high -- 220,000 in the Democratic caucus out of a total population of less than 3 million. If you deduct Republicans, underage citizens, and the unregistered, that's very good participation, since caucusing makes serious demands on your time (it's not just showing up and voting).

I would guess that the Iowa Democratic party has found the caucuses a very good organizing tool this year. The party should be much stronger this fall because of the caucus.

[mugwump2]

Did it never occur to you, Brad, that the version of the article you quote was written and posted before there were any firm numbers on either delegate vote counts or turnout?

[Either you have information--in which case you report it--or you don't have information--in which case you say you don't know.]

[c.l. ball]

>No numbers about how Iowans are and are not representative of >the nation. No numbers about how caucus goers are or are not >representative of party activists, party members, or the >overall population.

Why should this be in the lede of the story? Iowa still selects the first delegates to the party conventions. Are primary voters representative of the overall population in any state?