Ah, journalism.
It’s like mining for diamonds, really. More often than not, you spend
inordinate amounts of time seeking gemstones and find nothing of value.
Occasionally, you uncover little gems like this one.
This “little” gem
goes against everything the Liberal model of journalism stands for, and somehow
embodies its spirit perfectly. It shows no party parallelism, and no obvious
bias. It is direct, informative, and conversational—despite its extreme
relative length, even the dense statistics do not seem daunting.
The jist of the
story is this: with statistical evidence “going back 36 years into newspaper
clippings and gallup polling archives,” we have no substantial evidence to say
that Romney does or doesn’t have a shot at the presidency. To say his task of
securing a lead over Obama following any securing of the Republican nomination
will be easy would be absurd. Possible? Perhaps. Likely? Not by the numbers.
And there are plenty of numbers.
While most
American journalism is events-based, this is not the case for this article.
Andrew Romano, the author of this fine piece of journalism, no doubt spent long
hours researching the past 36 years of statistics. As such, it is
comments-based, and focuses as political scientists like to focus—on trends and
hard evidence.
So while most journalism is a “5 year olds’ soccer game,”
there seems to be a braniac on the bench working strategy.
Andrew Romano as American Journalism's Aladdin: a true "Diamond in the Rough."
No comments:
Post a Comment