This is very good analysis of the state of political reporting under the spotlight of New Hampshire primary results. While it may somewhat underplay the intangibles associated with an early primary win, it nevertheless makes its case strongly.

The article addresses the intellectually depraved election coverage by big corporate press. The call for issues coverage is persuasive.

This piece is ultimately a critique of the failure of the mainstream media to provide the public with information about policy positions of candidates. MSM's fixation on candidates as entrants in a race to be decided by personality and money not only misinforms but also manipulates the election process. It is MSM's job to inform not to predict outcomes. And when their predictions are wrong explaining away the erroneous prediction wastes the readers time.

=A key sentence that sums up well what coverage should be: "Reporters should strive for coverage that holds up no matter what the results are." =Combined with a perfect quote from Chris Matthews that exemplifies all that is wrong with political journalists today. "well then what do we do....?"

This is a great overview....both barrels...at two paces. This needs front page in all newspapers and TV news. Russert and Mathews earned the spanking.

I understand the point being made, but nine polls were wrong and the post vote poll was wrong too. Yes reasonable, fair minded television journalist almost do not exist. The second issue is either voters change their mind quickly on limited information or they lie inconsistently.

I think Chris Matthews is one of the worst "journalists." Instead of just asking the panelists a question, he gives his own point of view and then asks them to comment. If they disagree, he acts incredulous and restates his position as many times as time permits. He doesn't give his guest a chance to finish his statements and is always talking over him, thus making both of them unintelligible. (Speaking at the same time does not work in the electronic media even though it might be clear for those in the studio.) I don't think he was too happy with Brokaw's mild rebuke. Brokaw was, of course, right; there is plenty to analyze other than the horserace.