Should news organizations keep certain stories secret until they feel the public is ready for them?

[Nye Bevan]

I think it smacks of elitism when news executives have a story all ready to go but decide to temporarily withhold it from the public because they don't want to steal a certain politician's thunder. Or they don't want someone casting a vote to have access to the information in the news story. I don't see much difference in holding back a genuine news story about delegate counts and holding back a story about (for example) a candidate's DUI until after the election.

[Trust Buster]

1. We all knew this day was coming as well as their reaction to it. Find a good bunker somewhere.

[Agnosticsherbet]

2. It is not the media's job to hold our hand and show us only what we are ready for.

So, no.

[Sheepshank]

3. There are a lot of "theories" being floated...

.....Regarding the timing on releasing the delegate number and making the call. The bottom line being, AP has some news and they won't hold back.

[jberryhill]

4. Mainly the ones about UFO's and the real moon landing

[braddy]

5. Like calling presidential elections before the West Coast has voted?

[Nye Bevan]

6. I know I'm in a minority on this, but I would be fine with real-time exit polls being released

all day on election day. If someone on the West coast knows that the election has already been decided, they can stay home if they want, but they still have the option of voting. Or if OTOH the election hangs very much in the balance, based upon exit polls, maybe more people on the West coast would vote than normal.

[braddy]

7. When Carter conceded the election early in 1980, it killed the West Coast down ticket voting.

You forget that announcing a presidential winner can lead masses of voters to blow off voting on the West Coast, and there is more involved than just the presidency.

[bigwillq]

8. No (nt)

[geek tragedy]

9. they shouldn't manufacture news.

I do think, from a civic point of view, there's something disquieting about how this played out. The Clinton campaign didn't publicly state it had these commitments, and wasn't counting them externally, but the AP used them to declare the Democratic race over, 12 hours before primary voting begins.

there's nothing elitist about reporting that the Clinton campaign has unannounced commitments, and on those grounds not counting them on the scoreboard.

we don't know who these delegates are, how many of them there are, etc etc etc.

Just not good.

[morningfog]

10. Elitism is super delegates getting obscenely weighted votes in the nomination.