And the winner is . . . . . . we don’t know yet

The Gore Wins! Bush Wins! Nobody Wins! election night had editors around the country twisted into knots and caused a rare sleepless night in Vero Beach

By Larry Reisman

I wrote the following column about 6 a.m. Nov. 8, 3.5 hours after TV networks declared George W. Bush winner in Florida, and about two hours after the vote was called too close to call. The column ran Nov. 9. I write a column that explains to readers how and why difficult news decisions are made.

In almost 20 years in the news´ paper business, I’ve never had a sleepless night due to something that would be in my newspaper the next mornng.

Wednesday morning was an exception. It took a while to fall asleep after finding out — I think about 4 a.m. — that George W. Bush, after all, was not the president-elect.

At 2:15 a.m. or so, Dennis Durkee, the Press Journal’s news editor, and I were watching television and trying to follow election returns on the Internet when the major television networks, like dominoes, declared that Bush had defeated Democrat Al Gore in Florida.

Editors had completed the paper at about 1:20 a.m. with the kind of “news” that most editors in our industry figured would be old by Wednesday morning, that Bush and Gore were in a dead heat.

We wanted to be the first to tell readers, when they got up, just who their next president would be.

And we did, well sort of, and maybe. It just depends.

After the networks’ pronouncements, we prepared to remake our front page, figuring that a projection from the Associated Press, our respected source for news, would be the next in line.

While we tinkered with the original front page, whose banner headline read, “NECK AND NECK,” we pondered running several declaratory headlines: “BUSH PULLS IT OUT,” “BUSH EKES OUT WIN,” “BUSH BY A HAIR,” “BUSH EDGES GORE.”

Dennis wanted to wait until AP moved its story. As our press printed the first edition at 23,000 copies per hour, I wanted to make sure that we got at least something in before all the papers were printed.

By 2:40 a.m., I felt that we had to make a decision. The AP said it was not prepared to make a decision because it could not confirm that the numbers used by the networks were correct. The AP was re-counting the numbers based on numbers provided by state elections officials.

Based, in part, on my trust of AP, and on my own skepticism of the networks, which had earlier declared Gore the winner in Florida, I decided to rewrite the presidential story by explaining merely what had occurred:

“George W. Bush was declared president-elect early this morning by the major television networks after he and Al Gore traded state-by-state victories Tuesday in a dramatic presidential election. As of 2:40 a.m., the Associated Press has yet to make a projection.”

Next came writing the headline. “BUSH EKES OUT WIN” was the choice until the skepticism sank in.

Frankly, I didn’t want to repeat history and print a “Dewey defeats Truman” headline.

So, we hedged with the vague “BUSH GETS NOD,” which, to me, meant that Bush got the nod from the networks.

A summary headline stated a fact, not a conclusion: “Late reports from Florida place Republican over the top.” The only conclusion we made was that we checked Bush’s name in our front-page chart, giving him 271 electoral votes.

By the time I left the office about 3:30 a.m., the press was rolling with the changes and I was proud that we would have the latest information for about 10,000 readers.

Our distribution workers planned to put out cards at all our racks accouncing the Bush win. They also had pre-printed “Gore wins!” rack cards.

By 4 a.m., I had settled in to watch TV and learned that Gore had rescinded his concession call to Bush. Then there was the state’s announcement of a re-count.

It was as if I had taken a box of No-Doz.

I questioned my decision to re-make the front page. Complete accuracy, after all, is the hallmark of a quality newspaper. I felt we let some of our readers down.

Then I thought about how the Press Journal couldn’t have been the only newspaper with such a problem.I found out we weren’t.

I knew we did our very best not to mislead anyone, and that our headline was purposely muted with that goal in mind. The story accurately depicted the latest news we could give our readers.

Furthermore, our coverage had referred readers to (www.TCPalm.com), our web site, which had superior up-to-the minute coverage.

Eventually, I slept for a couple of hours, awakened by a sense of curiosity and fueled by the adrenalin of the biggest story I’ve ever encountered — sitting in my own back yard.

Those of us who have covered this election the past few months, frankly, are tired of it.

We’re weary of the negativity, the finger-pointing, threats and complaining. We deal with it because it’s our job, and it’s part of our obligation to serve our readers.

But we’re inspired by the high voter turnout, the democracy and spirit that active members of both major parties have shown during the campaigns.

It is said that the presidential re-count could take 10 days. We’ll be here to tell the story accurately, objectively and with passion in what we do.

Reisman is editor of The Press Journal in Vero Beach, Fla.