Election Night Narratives: Who Controls the Story?

 On Election Night, television broadcasters claim to "report the results." In reality, these broadcast systems serve as narrative generators.

Each network emphasizes a different aspect of a story about the election (the momentum behind winners or losers; the emotional response of voters; the potential threat to established institutions).

This allows the media to frame its ability to create a definition of what is at stake and how audiences should make sense of the unfolding events.

Consider the 2020 Presidential Election:

Fox News was the first network to declare Arizona for Joe Biden, which generated a great deal of outrage from Fox's own loyal audience.

MSNBC framed the election as an opportunity to protect democratic norms.

CNN emphasized data-driven trends and changes in demographics.

Although all three networks reported on the same numbers, they presented very different political realities.

Over time, election coverage has changed from being strictly informative to entertaining. A color map, a countdown clock, and a fight between pundits are similar to sports reporting. Journalists are motivated to sensationalize the ambiguity of elections ("too close to call," "a shocking upset," "a path to victory")

The problem with the evolution of election reporting is that the reporting is no longer biased towards either party, but rather the process of politics has been transformed into spectacle. As audiences begin to see politics through the lens of entertainment, they begin to be emotionally invested in conflict over policy. This leads to increased affective polarization: voters dislike each other more than they can identify with each other.

References

• Iyengar, S., & Hahn, K. S. “Red Media, Blue Media.” Journal of Communication, 2009.

• Patterson, T. E. Out of Order. Vintage Books, 1994.

• Stroud, N. J. Niche News: The Politics of News Choice. Oxford University Press, 2011.