American Polis intern Alex Steven Forbess reports on the US midterm elections as seen from London and reflects on how national media cover other countries polls

Stevens, Alex

LSE Research Online

We cover Them2014-11-5Bland or bias? Election watching across the Atlantic: US,UK and Scotland (guest blog)blogs.lse.ac.uk /polis/2014/11/05/bland-or-bias-election-watching-across-the-atlantic-us-uk-and-scotland-guest-blog/American Polis intern Alex Steven Forbessreports on the US midterm elections as seen from Londonand reflects on how national media cover other countriespolls.If anyone wants to understand how the United States seems toact chaotic while maintaining a smiling face, my advice is tostay alert whenever a major election occurs.By the time I have published this article, the 2014 US midtermelection would have closed and Republicans are celebratingbecause they not only reached their goal of earning sevenmore seats in the Senate but they also increased theirpresence in the House of Representatives, earning 12 moreseats. While the final voting ballots still being counted, themost updated result shows Republicans earned 52 out of 100seats in the Senate and 241 out of 435 seats in the House,according to FOX News.While I set aside my informative rant on how Democrats blew their shot of rallying support, again, I was curious tolook at how other international news organisations were covering the event, compared to its American competitorssuch as ABC or FOX News. For arguments sake, I’ll use the BBC World News and Aljazeera in this observation.However, no matter which news website I browsed through, I found the same, homogenised coverage beingproduced. Whether it was the BBC or ABC, they all had reporters providing tweets, live coverage and revealed theappalling, but not new, topic of “dark money” sent from anonymous special interest groups to fund both main politicalparties, which totaled to $900mn out of the overall $3.67bn (£2.29bn) according to the BBC.Theatre of NewsOf course there were some news shows that were more theatrical than others, most noticeably in the States. Forexample, Todd Starnes from FOX Strategy Room displayed handwritten posters saying the FOX viewers wantedRepublicans “to repeal Obamacare by any means necessary;” he also stated voters between 18 to 24 years oldwere less concerned about the “cultural wars such as gay rights” and more concerned about gun ownership, whichis shown in this link.BBC’s North America editor Jon Sopel was prompt to write an article this morning about Kentucky Senator MitchMcConnell’s new, presumptive power as the next Senate majority leader, along with President Obama’s increasedisolation in the White House, which all can be found in this link.The only exciting thing I can say is that the world was watching, even if this just was a midterm election. When Iwent to lectures within the past couple weeks, I’ve had both informative and frustrating comments about the bipolarenvironment in Washington, D.C.However, this realisation got me thinking about the 2015 UK election. With all the anticipation building up within the1/2next six months, from Westminster to Polis, I already knew this type of energy will not be as prominent back at theStates.Scottish Vote CoverageLooking back at the Scottish Referendum, most international news outlets were staying updated well before 18September came for Scotland to say “yes” or “no.” But there were a few that didn’t provide equal coverage, and oneof them just happened to be the fair, balanced United States of America.I arrived in London around late-August but regardless where I was at the time, I could easily have found articles andvideo segments on Aljazeera that covered the event. When I was asking friends back home if the Referendum wasgetting any traction back home, it wasn’t until maybe within the final week they noticed a sound bite or an articlefrom NBC or ABC NewsI am still laughing when I re-read an article written by a New York correspondent of the Guardian, Nicky Woolf. Thesummary is that regardless of the outcome and potential ramifications it could bring to Washington, US officials andthe public just didn’t care.There was a minority amongst US citizens, including me, that was interested in the Referendum results but even Iwas stubborn to figure out why America wasn’t paying attention. Like the US midterms, the Referendum was adomestic issue that could produce international effects.Now that that world watched the US, it seems that the world is watching how it will provide, or at least try to provide,the same, quality coverage for the UK. If the US didn’t think the Referendum would affect them, they have anotherthing coming if they ignore the results on 7 May.This report by Polis intern Alex Steven Forbess Copyright © 2014 London School of Economics and Political Science2/2

Bland or bias? Election watching across the Atlantic: US, UK and Scotland (guest blog)

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

LSE Research Online