Early Endorsements Bear Watching
The Seattle Times is the second newspaper to make an early endorsement for president. The paper has thrown its support behind Kerry, as the Philadelphia Daily News did in June. Something is in the air, but I am not sure what. Newspapers typically endorsement presidential candidates in October.
Although the issue has not been puit to much empirical scrutiny, scholars and media professionals generally think that endorsements might have an effect on voters who are on the fence during election day. Given the possibility that fence-sitters might determine the outcome of the election, endorsements may carry more weight than usual. Early endorsements raise interesting questions for scholars and citizens. Do early endorsements shape news in ways that will favor one candidate over the other? By this, I am not asking if it necessarily gives the endorsed candidate an edge. The crazy logic of journalistic balance could cause people on the news side to go out of their way to be tougher on the candidate the editorial side endorsed in an effort to show that news and editorial are separate realms. When we throw in the larger questions of voter influence, early endorsements are a development to watch.
But in the meantime, the Seattle Times editorial has some tough things to say about Bush, the man the page endorsed four years ago.
Four years ago, this page endorsed George W. Bush for president. We cannot do so again — because of an ill-conceived war and its aftermath, undisciplined spending, a shrinkage of constitutional rights and an intrusive social agenda.
The Bush presidency is not what we had in mind. Our endorsement of John Kerry is not without reservations, but he is head and shoulders above the incumbent.
12:10:20 PM 
|
