The Daily Novel

Peter Preston, former editor of The Guardian and now a columnmist, asked the question in a weekend blog, ‘Why did we get wrong about Hillary?’ It was the right question but if you read the article you will not find any satisfactory answers. Since I was one of the few who did not write Hillary off after the Iowa vote, and did not write Obama off after the New Hampshire vote I will make a first stab at answering the question posed by Preston.

 Preston makes the important point that the press covering the campaign, travelling on the same bus, and mixing daily with the spinners of the candidates, got swept along with the feelings being expressed. Iowa was a shock for the Clinton camp and their despair was communicated to the press corps. Likewise, after New Hampshire, the media communicated the opposite view. So nearly everyone pronounced that it was an open race between Clinton and Obama.

That’s the Democratic race. But after New Hampshire the media went bingo for McCain as the Republican leader, with no-one apart from me saying that acutally his age might be a substantial deterrent. My own view is that the Republican race is entirely open. Huckabee and McCain and Romney cannot yet be written off. Neither can the Mayor of New York who is entering the race in the Florida primary. And on the sidelines there is the hugely wealthy Blomberg who still might run as an independent with Republican sympathies.

Preston also makes the point that the British newspapers both broadsheet and tabloid are carrying far more than is usual on the US election. Partly because the online versions of The Times The Guardian and The Daily Telegraph, have garnered many readers in the US. So they all have many people covering the election. As for the BBC, although they are supposed to be cutting back, they appear to have sent at least 150 reporters out to cover it!!!

This frenetic activity is not as idiotic as it seems. This American election is certainly the most important in my lifetime. America is the dominant world power. And although in economic terms China is catching up fast, America is beyond question the only world power whach has the military  might to blast those who disagree with it’s policies into eternity.

This US election is vital, because it will decide whether the US continues to be governed by someone like George Bush, who despite his wafer thin majority, has followed his own minority view, and launched a war which is not only hated by many other countries, but is profoundly dislked by, currerntly, more than 60 per cent of Americans.

So why are the journalists getting it wrong?

My preliminary answer is that the most important fact is the pressures on reporters and their editors. Reporters on the spot are asked to report for several groups. The BBC lot have to service BBC News 24 as well as all the domestic channels. The newspaper lot have to write for the print edition and for the web. And they are also asked to do video broadcasts, although many of them have only recently learned the techniques of talking their copy rather than writing it.

All this takes away from their time for reflection. To give a considered analysis of what is happening in the area of the world they are reporting on.

 This is the first US election since the web has really taken off. The mainstream news media are still dominant, despite the millions of bloggers like me. But even those who buy the newspapers are reading it first on the web.

This is a totally different situation to that holding when the last US election was fought only four years ago. And it makes it very difficult for the viewer to decide what is fact and what is opinion.

The Washington Post reports today on a new poll which shows Obama up 14 points. But the key thing is that it shows that Clinton is still supported by 42 per cent of Democratic  voters, campared with only 37 per cent for Obama.

In other words, contrary to what we have all been reading, Clinton is still very much the front runner amongst American Democratic voters.

Tomorrow, South Carolina votes in the primaries, which result will also have massive coverage. Since I have been there, and have friends there, i know that it has many influences that are not shared by other states. So beware any predictions based on what the voters decide there.

And beware any news organistion which trumpets too loud on what it means for the national result.

There are many battles still ahead. But I totally applaud the volume of the coverage of the US elections in the British press. It is far more important, than whether Hain should resign because of his admitted incompetance in relation to his election returns. Or whether Gordon Brown is going to survive his blunders.

Who is the next US President is actually more important to our well-being than who is the next British Prime Minister. Young people know this. More than those of my generation.

But that does not mean that it is not important who is the next UK Prime Minister.

But, and her my view is clear, we want someone who is alive to the realities of Britain’s place in the world. But someone who is not the lackey of US policy and american consumer capitalism, which is what both Blair and Brown are guilty of.