Post-election programming

What is a Critical Conversation? | Printable discussion guide

News organizations spend so much time planning for and covering elections that the work to be done afterward can almost come as a rude awakening: What — we have to keep going?

Some newsrooms face the added pressure of having to think about ways to “capture the bump” — the rise in engagement that sometimes occurs in campaign season. If audiences are here for elections and campaign stories, the thinking goes, we must find new content engaging enough to keep them.

It can all feel exhausting, so here are some discussion points aimed at making post-election programming go a little more smoothly.

Who’s in this conversation?

Top editors, audience and analytics team, politics reporters and editors, policy and/or government reporters, social media team.

The agenda

1. Are we interpreting our election bump (if there was one) with precision?

The election “bump” — when news engagement rises along with interest in an election year — has been much analyzed among media experts. Some have cited a “Trump bump,” the idea that the ongoing drama surrounding the former president also generated interest in news. Then, when President Biden dropped out of the running in July, Axios said a “seismic news cycle” provided a new lift. But a bump is often followed by a bust. In his NiemanLab 2024 prediction, Rasmus Kleis Nielsen, director of the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism, suggested that newsrooms avoid reading any bump as a turning point for the business.

This might be an interesting debate among media experts, but only you can discern what any election bump you may see tells you about what kind of journalism your specific audience is looking for and whether there are lessons to be had for your post-election news planning.

Consider these actions:

• Dig into your analytics to look at what drove the bump (if you saw one). Can you categorize the highest-performing pieces? Were they about the candidates’ sparring back and forth, i.e., the horse race? Or were they stories that helped people understand the issues? Or how to cast their votes? How votes are counted and results certified? Candidate profiles? Ballot questions? If stories giving readers useful or actionable information generated the most engagement, that might inform your post-election programming.
• Appeal directly to people who seem to be coming just for the politics content. Are there ways to ask them specifically what they’d like to see next? Consider calls for input and feedback in politics-focused (or politics-heavy) newsletters, for example. Or QR codes in printed content like voter guides that could take people to a questionnaire on what they’d like to see next.
• For people who came to your content just for political stories, can you give them ways to see politics-adjacent pieces that might help build loyalty? For example, can you use “related content” modules to link to stories about local government or issue explainers? This “planned serendipity” might help consumers of political news see value in your other offerings.

2. During the campaigns, are we reporting with an eye toward post-election stories?

Campaign reporting can inform post-election work in many ways. You learn what promises politicians are making. You learn what issues people care about. You hear themes being repeated by both candidates and voters. You learn whether there is a significant amount of distrust about the accuracy of election results in your community. Are there ways to capture those to inform your post-election reporting?

Consider these actions:

• Keep a list of the candidates’ noteworthy promises so that you can assemble post-election stories about what challenges they face in keeping them, or what consequences they might incur for failing to do so.
• Reporters interacting with their community can ask interview subjects if they would mind being available for interviews after the results are in, so that you’re not starting from scratch when putting together post-election stories. Some reporters will do this as a matter of course, but it’s worth reinforcing the habit.
• Keep a running tally of the top issues people in your community cite when you’re talking to them. This will inform post-election analyses of the problems voters expect the winners to tackle.
• If there is a significant amount of controversy over the accuracy of the election tally and the certification of results, look for ways to get beyond the immediate dispute by looking at the longer-term impact of the controversy — on the winners’ ability to govern, and on how election officials will operate in the future.

3. How can we help people be civically engaged beyond casting their ballot?

Heightened engagement during a campaign may mean that people are more tuned in during an election. But they might be unaware of how they might engage beyond casting their votes. It’s worth discussing how your news organization can help people be more active participants in their community beyond voting.

Consider these actions:

• Lay it out specifically in your journalism, e.g., “Five ways you can remain involved beyond voting.”
• Publish a “civic participation handbook.” Possibly work with civic groups that can give you ideas for how people can influence their local councils, school boards or state legislatures.
• Interview public policy makers and lawmakers about how ordinary people have influenced them. Publish or air stories about people who have used grass-roots influence to get things done. Those can motivate people to get involved.

4. What content should we offer to people who are exhausted by politics?

Some in your audience may have tuned in for campaign coverage, but are ready to “change the channel” after the election. How can you show empathy for that very specific kind of news fatigue in an effort to keep your news organization in their orbit?

Consider these actions:

• Is your community as divided as you are portraying it? Journalists sometimes unintentionally highlight divides as a way of showing how two sides of an issue differ, and people can perceive that is intractable and constant conflict. But there may be a greater “middle” group of people who aren’t as passionate as the ones who are outspoken — and willing to be quoted. Is there a way to incorporate those people into your post-election programming?
• In the same vein, consider stories about people who are working to bridge divides in your community. Think through how bridging efforts might inform your journalism. For more, see API’s resources on bridging.
• Election season usually ends at about the time holiday season begins, providing a natural segue to a different kind of content. Government bodies tend to take a break around that time, too, meaning politics and government reporters (unless they’re taking needed time off) can work on pieces they’ve had on the back-burner. If it’s a passion project, they will appreciate it.
• Similarly, some politics reporters have their own following, a fan base of sorts. Help humanize them with audiences by giving them time to work on fun feature stories that have nothing to do with politics. They’ll bring a fresh perspective and may appreciate the change of subject — as will the people who follow them.

5. Are we gathering lessons for next time?

Election planning naturally includes looking at past efforts, including what worked and what didn’t. It’s easy, though, for the lessons to get lost in the process, so is there a way to gather them in the process (and debate them later)?

Consider these actions:

• Create a central “lessons” repository that everyone can contribute to. Make clear that this is a place for ideas they thought worked so that they can be considered for the next election season.
• What work did your journalists feel was a waste of their time during election season? What were they most proud of? Do their views align with what audience data is telling you? If not, schedule time for a productive conversation on how (and whether) to reconcile the two.
• In retrospect, was there any election work that could have been collaborations with other news organizations or civic groups? How would your staff have felt about that? Ask them.