Editorial: Poll debacle blots media credibility

The confusion smacked more of a Third World election than that of the world's most wired democracy at the dawn of the 21st century. And when a semblance of order was restored after the American election cliffhanger, no party had more egg on its face than the media. No group had, in fact, contributed more to the unprecedented chaos. The only certainty of the presidential race is that election projections will never be viewed in the same light again.

Mistake heaped upon mistake as both television networks and newspapers rushed to judgment at breakneck speed. Incredibly, this culminated in the spectacle of Al Gore conceding defeat on the say-so of television networks which had declared George W. Bush the winner. Ninety minutes later, after further vote counting, Mr Gore had retracted his concession. If the Vice-President should have been more prudent, that is as nothing to the circumspection and soul-searching required of the media as it seeks to retrieve its battered credibility.

The seeds of the debacle lie, of course, in the intense competition between the television networks. CNN, a johnny-come-lately alongside CBS, NBC and ABC, has fashioned its reputation on providing instant coverage and analysis of breaking news stories. Its success has heightened the impulse - inherent in all news organisations - to be the first to break big stories. That impulse, and the extreme pressure to satisfy it, can, however, easily lead to misjudgment if it is not harnessed wisely.

The expectation of one of the tightest elections in United States history should have been good reason to exercise caution. The errors of judgment, however, began early in the vote count. Exit poll data persuaded the television networks to call the pivotal state of Florida for Mr Gore. Almost two-and-a-half hours later, this had to be retracted when the news service transmitting the exit data suffered a crisis of confidence.

More damagingly still, the networks later gave Florida to Mr Bush after almost 98 per cent of the vote had been counted. At this point, wiser counsel should have prevailed. Analysis of the outstanding vote in Florida would have revealed that much of this would in all likelihood favour Mr Gore. And that under Florida law, a recount would be required if the voting margin was within 0.5 per cent. When the Florida vote tightened to about 1800 votes, as should have been anticipated, the networks were forced to make their second retraction.

This climbdown came, of course, only after the Florida projection had led the networks to declare Mr Bush the new President. That, in turn, prompted Mr Gore's concession and major embarrassment for many American newspapers. Unsurprisingly perhaps, the Chicago Tribune, which in 1948 ran a banner headline erroneously proclaiming "Dewey Defeats Truman," played it safe. "As close as it gets. Gore offers, then rejects concession. Decision hangs on Florida outcome," was its wordy, if scrupulously accurate, headline.

However, other newspapers ensnared by the repeated reverses in the Florida count proclaimed Mr Bush the winner. In their defence, they could claim only that when they were going to press, the election had been won by Mr Bush because his opponent had conceded.

This newspaper was itself caught up in a combination of this process and tight deadlines, running an editorial in its first edition which commented on Mr Bush's ascendancy to the presidency.

The American media inquests are well under way. Evidence of a more sober approach should become apparent as the recount proceeds in Florida. If the margin remains razor-thin, wise counsel would suggest that media pronouncements of victory should await the counting of a couple of thousand ballots mailed from overseas.

At that point, however, there will be a huge temptation to end the suspense and proclaim Mr Bush the President. Most of those ballots will, after all, come from American military personnel, who typically lean heavily to Republican candidates. Some extremely slow learners will be at work, however, if such temptation is not resisted.

The Chicago Tribune showed it had not forgotten the calamity of handing the presidency to the wrong candidate. Now, it is up to much of the rest of the media to eat humble pie and learn the same lesson.