ABC Discourages Western Voters from Turning out to Vote

by Deb Cupples |   Watching last night's election returns on ABC TV was about as disgusting as the thought of chugging a pint of rancid, liquefied lard.  Maybe more so.

I started watching the election returns at about 7:30 pm.  By 9:00 or so, ABC said that Obama had 200 electoral votes, indicating that he was well on his way to winning.  Then I went to  ABC's electoral map on the Internet.  What did I find? 

That ABC was predicting the winner (i.e., giving out electoral votes to a candidate) for states that had reported as few as 1% of votes. One-percent?  Does anyone with any knowledge of statistics think that one-percent is reflective of an entire state's population -- especially states with distinct red and blue pockets?

Here's why premature predictions upset me:

A lot of states' polls close hours after the East Coast polls.  How many registered voters in Western states decided to not even bother voting because premature prognosticators at ABC had already proclaimed a winner in their states?

Seriously.  What's the point in standing in line at the polls after a long day's work when a "trusted," mainstream news source says one or the other candidate is so far ahead?

How many more voters might have shown up if ABC's premature prognosticators had simply kept their mouths shut for a few extra hours -- say, until the West Coast polls had closed? 

Would those voters have changed the election outcome if they'd shown up instead of going home early because ABC had already called a winner in their states?

Me, I'm glad that Obama won and that ABC turned out to be right.  But that's not the point.

We'll never know how any election is affected by premature predictions in the media, because polling is an art, not a science -- as evinced by the repeated failure of "reputable" polling outfits to accurately predict winners in some of the Democratic primaries earlier this year.

The airwaves belong to the public.  The Federal Communications Commission (FEC) grants licenses to TV broadcasters, expecting broadcasters to serve the public. To promote the public's interest, the FEC can promulgate rules and regulations.

The FEC should promulgate rules that prohibit TV broadcasters from predicting elections before the Western states' polls close, precisely because prematurely announcing winners can discourage voters from voting on election day.

And discouraging voter participation in a democracy is anything but a public service.

Comments

[James Stripes]

I watched the election coverage on CBS. At exactly 8:00pm, when the polls closed in the Pacific Time Zone, they called California, Oregon, Hawaii, and Washington for Obama. It was less a problem than it has been in the past. Here in Washington state, the two most populous counties--King and Pierce (Seattle and Tacoma and suburbs between) had polling places. The rest of the state has become 100% mail-in. I voted Sunday; my spouse voted last week.

I've been angry about this tendency to call things early in previous years. It has gotten better, but it remains a problem.

[Deb Cupples]

Hi James,

ABC proudly announced in advance that it would call the elections early.

Me, I don't care if a prediction turns out to be right: I just think that it is wrong to prematurely call elections, because the predictions CAN affect voter turnout in Central and Western states.

[James Stripes]

I agree. It is wrong to call elections while polls are still open, although I'm almost tolerant of doing so when they are only open in Alaska and Hawaii.

That seems reason enough not to watch ABC. But, Katie Couric called the West Coast at exactly 8:00pm PST.

Such mistreatment is something we grow accustomed to on the West Coast. Sometimes it seems to affect football rankings, too. But, if USC cannot win, it's their problem.