CNN map shows gas prices rising sharply in Kansas counties on midterm night
CNN's interactive election-night map highlighted sharp gas price increases in several Kansas counties as midterm returns came in, with the state's Democratic Senate candidate leading.
CNN's interactive election-night map, dubbed the «magic wall», displayed gas prices alongside the midterm returns, showing fuel costs up 63 to 73 percent in multiple counties in Kansas. The broadcaster used the graphic to connect voting results with the cost of living, a pressure many voters have cited in the run-up to the midterms.
The same map showed Kansas's Democratic Senate candidate in the lead at the time the figures were displayed. Placing a Democratic lead beside steep fuel-price increases in a state that has long leaned Republican gave viewers a visual link between household finances and the contest on the ballot, without the graphic itself stating any conclusion about how voters were responding.
The presentation stood out because it placed economic data directly onto the returns rather than confining it to a separate segment. Election-night graphics typically focus on vote counts, turnout and projected winners, so the decision to layer in gas prices marked a departure from the usual format. The percentage increases were shown across several counties, meaning the rise was not confined to a single community but appeared in more than one part of the state.
The gas price figures were presented as a rise over the period displayed on the map, and the report accompanying the graphic did not supply a national average or a comparison with pre-election levels. Viewers were therefore given the local percentage changes, while the wider context of fuel costs across the country was left outside the frame of the broadcast.
Separately, a Daily Mail piece on the same night's television coverage turned its attention to the appearance of several on-air hosts, describing some as looking unrecognisably taut, tanned and plump during the midterm broadcasts. That piece concerned presenters' looks rather than the results or the data on the screens, and it did not add to the reporting on the Kansas figures or the Senate race.
Source: independent.co.uk
9
