Primary Instability Paradox: The Ethics of Media Coverage in Presidential Nominations

Abstract

This essay explores the ethics of how the press covers presidential nomination campaigns. It considers the implications of a predictive model that demonstrates how the nomination process limits voters' choices. Nominees may be predicted with a high degree of success before voting begins. Horse-race press coverage of the pre-primary period dramatically characterizes the process as unstable and up for grabs. By doing so, the press paradoxically contributes to the stability and, therefore, is complicit in limiting voter choice. The essay argues for telling the story of the impact of policy and governance on citizens’ lives.

Recommended Citation

Cline, Andrew R. (2006) "Primary Instability Paradox: The Ethics of Media Coverage in Presidential Nominations," The Forum: Vol. 3 : Iss. 4, Article 5.
DOI: 10.2202/1540-8884.1089
Available at: http://www.bepress.com/forum/vol3/iss4/art5