Earlier this week I did a quick rundown of some eye-catching interactive graphics that newsrooms at papers like The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal rolled out for Election Day. It would be unfair, though, to only focus on heavy-hitting sites that have dedicated interactive staff for such time-consuming projects. Across the country, smaller-circulation newspapers had to make the same decisions about how to visualize the data coming in on Election Night, but they had to make those decisions with far fewer resources. I believe the Times newsroom has at least two dozen people working full time on interactive projects; many smaller papers might be lucky to have a handful of people who know Flash.
Even if newsrooms have graphic artists working on election-result maps for the papers’ print versions, many do not necessarily allocate the same level of staff time to online displays. For instance, the San Jose Mercury News published several detailed maps in Wednesday’s print edition, but those maps did not appear online. Instead, MercuryNews.com displayed some simple pie charts, like these, showing the results of eight statewide races.

Karl Kahler, national/graphics editor at the News, explained that in his newsroom, the graphic design decisions are still made relatively separately for the print and online sides, although he is the first to say that integration would be a good idea. On Tuesday evening, his graphics team was mostly concerned with completing the maps for the next day’s print issue. They had to scramble to fill in all of the information as the poll numbers were announced.
In an interview on Wednesday, Kahler recalled a conversation he had with a New York Times online editor a few years ago: “I asked him, ‘How the heck do you put out so many data-rich projects on election night?’ He said, ‘Well, you get your data people to automate the process, import the data, and set it up ahead of time so it’s more or less automatic . You’ve got to talk to your tech people.’” To which Kahler laughed, “We don’t have those people anymore!”
Layoffs and staff turnover are obstacles to time-consuming interactive projects, obviously. James Meek is the only programmer working at The News Journal in Wilmington, Delaware, though there are about thirty people in the Journal newsroom. He and his editors decided a few years ago that Google Maps would be their go-to platform for their interactive projects, because it’s free and relatively easy to use. Here’s the simple map he developed to let readers look up the candidates in local elections:

As friendly as the Google Maps interface is, making alterations to certain programs with Javascript is not something one can necessarily learn in a day, Meek said. He taught himself about GIS mapping technology about five years ago when working on a hobby website of his own, and then started incorporating some of that knowledge into his daily work at the Journal. “This is not something that a totally novice amateur would start without some detailed training,” said Meek. “They could, but they’d have to want to, and people in the newsroom like the reporter sitting next to me is really busy doing interviews and writing, which she does extremely well, but she doesn’t have time to learn.”
Because of similar staff and time constraints, surely, some other news sites didn’t bother with any visual illustrations for their election coverage; they simply cut and pasted the election returns into text posts or spreadsheets, or just jazzed them up with colors and things. Some sites pasted a static graphic made for print into their online coverage. Still others built simple tools to help voters search for specific local results. Here’s one such simple tool, from the website of The Advocate in Stamford, Conn., a Hearst newspaper:


Great article, but you don't need to know GIS to make great maps to display election or other data. A good place to start is by searching wikimedia for maps. You can get open source SVG maps at the country, state, and county level. SVG maps are really easy to edit with a vector graphics program like Inkscape.
If you want to make your maps interactive, you really need to learn some Flash. However, there are many commercial out-of-the-box solutions that allow you to customize Flash maps by editing a text XML file. If you are interested, II write about interactive maps on my flash mapblog.
#1 Posted by Chris, CJR on Fri 5 Nov 2010 at 01:52 AM
Thanks, Chris. Your site has a lot of helpful info. I should have also linked to two pieces I wrote about embeddable maps Google put out for the election. Google is only one place to start, of course; there's a lot of really great free & easy software out there for news sites that want it.
#2 Posted by Lauren Kirchner, CJR on Fri 5 Nov 2010 at 01:30 PM
As a former employee of the wonderful St. Petersburg Times, I don't think it's fair that you insinuate that they are, as it says in the headline and article, a smaller-circulation paper. That's false. They're the largest paper in the state with 239,000 subscribers. Source: . And I'm willing to bet they have one of the largest newsrooms in the state, too.
Furthermore, the Dallas Morning News is also not what one would consider smaller sized, with it's 264,000 circulation. Source: Click here. Again, I don't think that's "small."
And lastly, the San Jose Mercury News is ALSO not a smaller-circulation newspaper, with 477,000 subscribers. Source: Click here. Yes, I know their paper's circulation figures are a mix of three papers, but I wouldn't hardly call them small, even if you were counting just the News.
The News Journal and the ProJo sound like the only two "smaller-circulation" papers included in this blog post. They all did some awesome work, and it's nice that you pointed it out. But I don't think it's fair to lump large papers all in a post about smaller circulation papers. It's factually incorrect.
#3 Posted by Andy Boyle, CJR on Fri 5 Nov 2010 at 02:38 PM
Hi Andy, thanks for the comment. You're right, those papers you mention aren't necessarily "small" - but they are small-er than the papers whose interactive projects I reviewed in my previous post on the same topic (New York Times, Wall Street Journal, etc.) That's why I linked to the wiki list of papers by circulation, to show the relative size of all of the papers I mentioned. But in fact, perhaps I should have been clearer, and referred to the smaller newsrooms (rather than smaller circulation figures) of these newspapers. The point of this piece, and I hope it came across, was that there is wonderful work being done in newsrooms that don't have, say, the 30+ full-time interactive staff of the NYT. For instance, I spoke with your colleague Darla Cameron, who told me that the Times newsroom has dozens of reporters, but she was still the only hand on deck for interactive online graphics on election night. My intent was to celebrate, rather than denigrate, the effort made by programmer-reporters like her.
#4 Posted by Lauren Kirchner, CJR on Fri 5 Nov 2010 at 03:19 PM
Yeah, but to be fair, there are really only a handful of papers that have the capacity to do the work the NYTimes and the WSJ do. So, if you're using those papers as the median, of course the St. Pete Times is going to seem smaller. (And, in full disclosure, I'm a digital developer for a subsidiary of The New York Times Co.)
I thought it was a nice piece highlighting some cool work. I just think the premise that some of these organizations are "smaller" because they're being compared to the biggest papers in our country is a bit much. That's all.
#5 Posted by Andy Boyle, CJR on Fri 5 Nov 2010 at 03:36 PM
Andy, yep, I understand what you're saying. I think you took the word "smaller" as a value judgment on my part. Smaller isn't bad, it's just different, of course. The New York Times has a certain set of resources, and so makes certain decisions: same for the St. Petersburg Times. I could have said "average-size" or something, I suppose. If I hadn't just written a piece on the NYT and WSJ (who both have unusually large interactive graphics teams) two days before I probably wouldn't have used the word "smaller" at all. Thanks for the feedback, in any case.
#6 Posted by Lauren Kirchner, CJR on Fri 5 Nov 2010 at 03:43 PM
I'm sorry, but this is going to hurt, and I don't want to sound like a hater. It's sad that these "interactive graphics" are acceptable, even impressive, to some in this industry. If we had any ability to attract talent in this industry we'd see just how mediocre these really are. I work at a 60,000 circ paper, so I can see why you're impressed (we don't have the staff to produce cool stuff anymore, not that we ever did). But because my focus is online, and I haven't been locked in the closet of the news business for my entire life, I just see this kind of stuff and shake my head. There's very little creativity here. And most of these tools evidently didn't get tested for usability. There's nothing new. Nothing that jumps off the screen and makes me say "Wow, a newspaper did that?" It's really just a bunch of maps you can click on and get results. I would imagine the user traffic to these tools didn't impress their creators.
#7 Posted by Mirv, CJR on Mon 8 Nov 2010 at 04:11 PM