Super Primary Tuesday
The Washington Post article following Super Tuesday was concise. It read, “Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama share a problem as they move deeper into the primary season: They have both issued promises to withdraw from Iraq that are impossibly vague, unrealistic or worse. They must now rectify this — for the good of their campaigns and the nation.”
Print coverage of Obama and Hillary following Super Tuesday was split between those that chose to focus on the results, concluding whether there was a candidate now expected to win the presidential nomination, and those that chose to evaluate what each candidate could do to secure the nomination in the remaining primaries.
The headline in USA Today read, “Obama, Clinton Locked in Virtual Tie”. Similarly, the U.S. News headline read, “Clinton, Obama Emerge From Super Tuesday Tied.” The stories that followed these headlines were equally as vague, not talking about the candidates’ policies or making any predictions, just reporting the results of Super Tuesday based upon the numbers.
Although countless newspapers had identical headlines, a few approached the story from a different angle. Those newspapers stood out from the rest by analyzing the situation in-depth. The Washington Post headline for the article above was “Promises They Can’t Keep”. The story looked at what has been expected of the candidates up to Super Tuesday and how those expectations will change and grow in the future. The Boston Globe’s headline read “Super Tuesday Shows How Much We Don’t Know”, again stating specifics in the story on Obama and Clinton and comparing their ideas.
Looking at print media on a national issue such as Super Tuesday it is obvious that the more prestigious papers are the ones that give detailed stories, attempting to get away from headlines that everyone will have.
Filed under: Spring 2008, Super Primary Tuesday