Comments are closed.
Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.
It's not super surprising that Nate Silver's "Obama wins, this is dumb" approach was unpopular with the crowd-milkers who wanted to sell a nail-biter.
Also, he stole all their thunder because he predicted highly accurate results far enough in advance that the "traditional" journalists could no longer build up anticipation.
What he really did was cast a big light on the fact that the News isn't really for information anymore and hasn't been for a long time. It's purely about entertainment. He made them all look bad in multiple ways.
I took one prominent J-ster to task for using "millions" and "billions" interchangeably. He responded "it's still an enormous [budget item] ... I've never been a numbers guy anyway".
1. Nate Silver was accurate;
2. Nate Silver was honest;
3. Nate Silver didn't fit into the culture at The New York Times.
Ergo, the culture of The New York Times doesn't allow for accuracy and honesty.
Glad we finally got that straight.
Like his Superbowl predictions were that right?
Of course, if Silver didn't get along with the NYT reporters, he's going to have a lot more trouble getting along with the gigantic blowhard Olbermann.
I also hope he doesn't get bogged down in sports reporting; it's just not that interesting, and there are plenty of other people mining that field extremely well. One of the things that made Silver stand out in politics is that he was the only one doing that work; in sports he's one of a thousand, some of whom are better at it than he is.
That and trivia like the Oscars. The thing that may be difficult for him to grasp about the Oscars is that people don't actually care who wins; they only care about the dresses.
Nate Silver is a treasure. I hope he's off to find better company.