so wondered how well foreign journalists would understand our voting system and if they were able to convey that understanding to their Public.I first thought it a good idea to analysis our own media for use as a baseline to comparison foreign sources. I would assume ours to be the most accurate but how ironic would it be if that were not the case. The N.Y Times had three articles on the front page that addressed current legal maneuvering of the two parties. One entitled "Gore Loses Recount . . ." addresses the current mood in the gore camp after the latest round of legal decisions, it is followed by more articles that paint the picture of a difficult situation for Gore looking more ominous after the previous days decisions. There was also an article that outlined the Federal Supreme Court's decision. The humanistic article was what I would consider a commentary on the supposed mood of the Gore camp, I say this because the article contains only one quote and proceeds to a gloomy conclusion. The rest of the articles are word for word court dialog and a text copy of the Federal ruling. These are straight from the source so there is no question as to their accuracy, both also included chronological accounts of the previous weeks activities as introductions. The combination of these articles made information abundant, given the gravity of the situation it is understandable that every angle was covered thoroughly. All in all it was very detailed coverage (N.Y. Times).The London Times was ran a story on the front page that I would consider a quality summery of all of the N.Y Times articles, it was accurate, clear, concise. The article highlighted all of the main subject points contained in its American counterpart while omitting some of the painstaking detail. While there was a small amount of indulgence, it was cleverly surrounded by fact that would logically support the inferences. Based on the coverage (front page) it received, I would cat...
