Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Election experts press news media for transparency on calling races

Fox News on Election Night 2016

The task force encourages news outlets to be transparent about their plans for election 2020 coverage.

Nicholas Hunt/Getty Images

With half or more of all ballots coming by mail this fall, it will take days if not weeks for the counting to be completed — likely delaying not only the climax of a close presidential race but also the final word about control of the Senate and dozens of other narrow contests.

Because at least this aspect of an unprecedented election has become easy to predict, the National Task Force on Election Crises, a recently formed group of election experts and academics, is urging the news media to be more transparent about its reporting process in order to give the public more confidence in the integrity of the results.

The task force on Wednesday asked the Associated Press, CNN, Fox News and the three broadcast networks for their detailed plans for reporting returns and calling races. Many other news organizations, including local TV stations and major newspapers, rely on these outlets (the AP most of all) before projecting a winner.


For previous presidential contests, the National Election Pool (just CNN, NBC, CBS and ABC this year) has relied on in-person and over-the-phone exit polling to model likely outcomes on a precinct-by-precinct and state-by-state basis — information they use to augment the returns as they come in. The AP and Fox News say this year they will use a different voter survey, conducted online and over the phone.

But these models will be complicated significantly by the certain surge in mail-in voting. Since most states are expecting unprecedented shares of votes cast remotely, the historical data on mailed ballots won't be much use when coming up with projections. And many states only turn to counting absentee ballots once the tabulating of in-person returns is finished.

To reassure the public about the reliability of results, the task force recommends news organizations publicly share the following at least one month ahead of Election Day:

  • How exit polling and voter surveys will account for the increase in absentee voting.
  • How discrepancies between results in hand the night of Nov. 3 and final results will be contextualized given ballot counting will take days or weeks, especially in battleground states.
  • Policies and procedures for protecting the people in the news division assigned to call races — so-called decision desks — from internal and external pressures to project a winner before results are clear.
  • Plans for covering any politician who declares victory before an accurate, evidence-backed projection has been made.

President Trump has signaled he plans to rely on the election night results to decide if he should claim re-election. Plenty of evidence says that could prove irresponsibly premature — especially in light of polling showing his supporters are much likelier to vote in person while Joe Biden's allies say they'll vote by mail.

The logical consequence would be that early returns suggesting a strong Trump showing will start evaporating, for a totally legitimate reason, as the envelopes are tabulated. The emerging nicknames for this are "the red mirage" or "the blue shift," depending on your point of view.

If news outlets take extra steps to increase transparency around their coverage, it will increase the public's confidence in the election process and outcome, the task force wrote.

"The role of the free press — your role — has never been more important," the letter concludes. "We urge you to take these additional steps towards transparency as part of your mission to inform the public and deliver accurate coverage of election results, especially how you account for the millions of expected absentee ballots. The American electorate — and our democracy — is depending on you."


Read More

An empty grocery cart in a market.

NYC Mayor Zohran Mamdani proposes five city-run grocery stores. See the arguments for and against, from food deserts to bodega concerns and the $70M cost.

Getty Images, Kwangmoozaa

Government-Owned Grocery Stores: Accessible Nutrition or Government Overreach?

Issue Introduction

Over the past few years, affordability has become the most central issue affecting Americans and the quality of life in the United States. The prices of groceries and basic necessities have risen 25-30% since the COVID-19 pandemic and are projected to rise another 3.2% in 2026. At the same time, the exodus of grocery chains from rural and low-income areas has scattered food deserts throughout individual states. Recent mass closures include Grocery Outlet’s shuttering of 36 stores and continued shut-downs of many Albertsons locations. These factors have led politicians to make affordability a major campaign issue.

During his progressive campaign for mayor of New York City, Zohran Mamdani raised the idea of opening grocery stores owned and operated by the city government to provide New Yorkers with affordable groceries. In his April 2026 public address that marked his first 100 days in office, Mayor Mamdani announced plans for the first of five city-run grocery stores. Mamdani’s proposed initiative will use $70 million in capital funding to build five city-owned municipal stores–one in each borough–and place them under control of the New York City Economic Development Corporation (NYCEDC). NYCEDC will then select third-party operating staff in accordance with city standards for affordability and proper labor practices. Public opinion following the announcement continues to be divided between uproar and support.

Keep ReadingShow less
Land of the Free, Home of the Capitalism Didn’t Fail America. America Failed to Moderate Capitalism
Monopoly's mr. monopoly in a graffiti collage
Photo by Artur Ament on Unsplash

Land of the Free, Home of the Capitalism Didn’t Fail America. America Failed to Moderate Capitalism

The signs are everywhere. For many Americans, buying power has improved only modestly despite decades of economic growth. Corporate profits are at an all-time high. We have reached a level of wealth inequality last seen almost a hundred years ago. By many measures, our capitalist economy seems to have failed to deliver broadly shared prosperity.

However, the failure isn’t with the free market as an economic approach. Instead, it’s our failure to regulate and moderate the free market, or more accurately, that we have spent 40 years undermining or removing the regulations of the New Deal that made our economy work for more Americans.

Keep ReadingShow less
Woman putting savings in a white piggy bank.

America’s economy now rewards asset ownership over wages. A policy proposal: a $35,000 Birthright Account for every child, and how it could be funded.

Guido Mieth/Getty Images

The American Dream Needs a New Economic Operating System

It is, by now, not an exaggeration to state that the traditional American Dream—work hard, buy a house, raise a family, and retire securely—is failing. It was built for a labor-based economy in which steadily rising wages allowed ordinary families to accumulate wealth. But America has become an asset-based economy, and ownership of those assets is extraordinarily concentrated.

Since the 1980s, the returns from capital have far outpaced the returns from labor. Inflation-adjusted wages for ordinary workers have risen only modestly, while the real value of equities has multiplied many times over. Housing, education, healthcare and childcare costs have soared, employment has become less secure, and defined-benefit pensions have largely disappeared. Even two-income households with respectable jobs often struggle to buy a home, build savings and accumulate enough for retirement.

Keep ReadingShow less