Read on Twitter
I hope there's a comprehensive postmortem about media presentation of the election results. The vast majority of Americans get their updates frpm major news channels, not Twitter or digging into county voting maps. So there's been a massive and stressful impact of this "wait."
Most of my family continues to be on edge, even though it's been a math-based fait accompli for like 36 hours. So the inconsistency in application in how and when states can count not only created room for baseless Trump claims, but has over-stressed a nation already maxed out.
I understand significant caution in making an official call, but I think the networks -- at least the coverage I watched -- could have done a much clearer and comprehensive job of explaining that Biden was very likely (and then certain) to win, even as the numbers didn't show it
Continuing to say things like "Well, it remains really close in Nevada. Only 12,000 votes!" when the rest of the votes are coming from Blue-heavy Clark County is a disservice, at best. I keep getting questions like "Why are you saying Biden will win PA? He's down 80,000 votes."
They also tried, but undersold, the timing aspect. Trump never "led" Pennsylvania. Trump was ahead in the votes that were tallied first because of state law and the imbalance in who used mail-in options. Making it sound like Biden has come from behind is inaccurate and harmful.
Especially in times like these, language and precision MATTER. And I think networks need to take a long look at how they present elections to the general public. This fell well short, imo, to the detriment of much of the nation.
