But I think 538 already did most of what you suggest in your column. And its podcast delved deeper and wider into polling, politics, and political issues.
I share your hopes for the future of data-driven journalism, but with cutbacks across the media universe, it’s hard to be optimistic.
I enjoyed 538’s journalists, website, and podcast, and think it was unique in the media landscape. What do you see on the horizon that will be better?
There are some specific critiques of 538's modeling and visualization in this piece (and other pieces) that their founder routinely dismissed out of hand. I'd hope that whatever/whoever comes next (I have no idea what it will be) would at least hear them out. And Silver routinely refused to engage in debate about the merits of certain polls and pollsters, which was a red flag to me.
You're right that the podcast was a stand-out product in re: much of what I mentioned (stakes of politics, issues, etc) but at the same time it also didn't seem grounded in the importance of public opinion, which was puzzling for a site devoted to elections.
Thanks for your column.
But I think 538 already did most of what you suggest in your column. And its podcast delved deeper and wider into polling, politics, and political issues.
I share your hopes for the future of data-driven journalism, but with cutbacks across the media universe, it’s hard to be optimistic.
I enjoyed 538’s journalists, website, and podcast, and think it was unique in the media landscape. What do you see on the horizon that will be better?
Hi Jeff, thanks for your comment.
There are some specific critiques of 538's modeling and visualization in this piece (and other pieces) that their founder routinely dismissed out of hand. I'd hope that whatever/whoever comes next (I have no idea what it will be) would at least hear them out. And Silver routinely refused to engage in debate about the merits of certain polls and pollsters, which was a red flag to me.
You're right that the podcast was a stand-out product in re: much of what I mentioned (stakes of politics, issues, etc) but at the same time it also didn't seem grounded in the importance of public opinion, which was puzzling for a site devoted to elections.
Thank you