Political Handicapping - Criticisms of Horse Race Coverage

Criticisms of Horse Race Coverage

Critics of the news media say that the vast majority of all articles during a political election are horse race style. Different criticisms have been raised as to why this is bad:

• It is argued that news sources tend to use Horse race journalism as a ploy to lure in audiences and tighten polls during election cycles by discrediting candidates favored to win and hyping underdogs

• Horse Race coverage is considered by some to actually cause voters to change their perceptions on a candidate in a sort of vicious cycle, for example a poll showing a third party candidate having a low support percentage may discourage other people from voting for that person so as to avoid the spoiler effect. This effect is magnified if a particular media outlet has a biased point of view that they want to get across. One way a biased news outlet would use this technique is similar to the "some say" rhetorical device, namely by making uncited references to constituent outrage or support of some particular issue.

• Some say horse race coverage destroys coverage of the issues, because often an article is mostly about how groups reacted to a speech or other presentation of a candidate on an issue, and has little room to discuss the candidate's point of view itself.

• A horse race style of article allows for the use of weasel words, that is, a subtle way of editorializing on the part of the author by focusing on the criticisms or praise of an anonymous or small group of voters

• It is argued that horse race coverage distracts voters from issues surrounding candidates by emphasizing poll results, regardless of how reliable the polls may be.