The summaries of Portland’s new city councilor election system, which chose 12 councilors representing four districts using ranked choice voting, have left out an important consideration. Because of this, the election process was skewed by the media.
The candidates who raised the most money were the main focus of print and broadcast media. The majority of these money were obtained through Portland’s Small Donor Program matching funding.
Candidates with a significant social media following and those whose names were familiar from prior government service had an edge in gathering funds and signatures. They were able to secure public money for their initiatives as a result.
It appears that the amount of money raised by candidates influenced media coverage more than the stances they took on many subjects.
Yes, all candidates were given the chance to submit a brief online video or survey responses to the majority of media sources. Instead than seeing every candidate prominently featured with equal exposure in news broadcasts or on TV panels, voters were forced to conduct some research and investigation.
According to one neighbor, she looked into the candidates for District 3 for almost two full days online and elsewhere. None of the candidates she supported were elected to the council. When did the media stop giving each contender equal time? It comes down to the fact that instead of giving candidates an equal chance to educate voters, the media ended up spoiling the election.
Note: Every piece of content is rigorously reviewed by our team of experienced writers and editors to ensure its accuracy. Our writers use credible sources and adhere to strict fact-checking protocols to verify all claims and data before publication. If an error is identified, we promptly correct it and strive for transparency in all updates, feel free to reach out to us via email. We appreciate your trust and support!