The presidential elections were covered with a variation of depth by several media networks in the United States on Tuesday night and Wednesday morning. Good coverage of news should be both detailed and varied (Strömbäck and Kaid, 2008). Some media networks covered the elections in depth while others did it shallowly, mostly giving their own opinions. CNN and NBC news gathered data from different States and offered insights based on the data. In contrast, the coverage done by MSNBC was ideological driven and provided limited information and data to the viewers. CNN news anchor, Wolf Blitzer was very brief in delivering the networks projections and provided a rationale for the projections. CNN projected a win for President Obama because it expected he would win in Ohio, a crucial State for the president. After the projections, the news anchor went silent and provided viewers with a chance to experience the real situation on the ground in various States and other countries such Kenya. On the other hand, MSNBC dwelt on opinions. Rachel Maddow the news anchor at MSNBC relied on projections done by NBC news for her arguments. The anchor denied viewers a chance to have a real experience on events taking place in different States by continuously discussing her opinion and policies.
The reporting from both NBC news and CNN was very informative because they provided information to the viewers, and when they made projections, they gave their reasons without going into details. Informative coverage should rely on facts rather than opinion. (Farnsworth and Lichter, 2004). They gave the viewers a chance to make projections on their own based on the information they provided. However, MSNBC provided distractive and annoying information. Instead of providing live coverage of events on the ground, the anchor spent most of the night giving her opinion based political ideologies.