Covering Student Government and Campus Elections Without Playing Favorites
Student government coverage comes with a built-in conflict that professional political reporters rarely deal with in the same way: the candidates a reporter covers during an election are often the same people that reporter will need as sources for the rest of the year. Covering them fairly, without either currying favor or holding a grudge over a rough interview, takes a deliberate approach rather than good intentions alone.
Set the ground rules before the campaign starts
Decide, as a newsroom, what coverage every candidate is entitled to before any single candidate has been interviewed. That typically means the same basic questions to every serious candidate for a given office, the same opportunity to respond to any criticism raised during the campaign, and the same word count or airtime allotted to comparable candidates, rather than giving more space to whoever happens to be more available or more quotable. Writing this down in advance protects the newsroom from the appearance of favoritism, and from the reality of it, since unequal treatment often creeps in gradually rather than through a single deliberate decision.
Cover the platform, not just the personality
It is easy for election coverage to drift toward whichever candidate is more charismatic in an interview, while a quieter candidate with a more substantive platform gets less attention. Ask every candidate the same specific questions about what they would actually do in office, and hold them to the same standard of specificity. A candidate who answers only in generalities about “improving student life” deserves a direct follow-up asking what that means in practice, and any specific claim a candidate makes about their own record or an opponent’s deserves the same verification you would apply to any source’s claim.
Handle endorsements and opinion separately from news coverage
If a student publication chooses to run an editorial endorsing a candidate, that is a legitimate editorial choice, but it needs to be clearly labeled as opinion and kept structurally separate from the newsroom’s news coverage of the race. A reporter assigned to cover the election as news should not also be the one arguing for a candidate in an opinion piece, since doing both undermines a reader’s ability to trust either piece as what it claims to be.
Verify claims made during a campaign
Candidates, like any source, sometimes state things during a debate or a campaign speech that are not accurate, whether about their own record, an opponent’s record, or a fact about school policy. A story that simply repeats a claim without checking it does readers a disservice, particularly close to an election when a false claim has less time to be corrected before votes are cast. Treat a debate claim the same way you would treat any other unverified statement, and check it before it runs unchallenged.
Reporting on results and close races
Once results are in, report the actual margin and any relevant context, such as turnout compared to previous years, rather than simply naming a winner. If a race is contested or a recount is requested, report what is actually known and avoid speculating about the outcome before it is officially confirmed. Close elections are exactly the situation where getting ahead of confirmed facts causes the most damage to a publication’s credibility.
Managing the relationship after the election
- Avoid running a substantially harder-hitting story about a candidate you personally supported losing to, or one you personally opposed winning; the standard should not change based on the outcome.
- If a winning candidate becomes a recurring source, keep the same standard of verification you would apply to any official, rather than treating a friendly relationship built during the campaign as a reason to go easier.
- Follow up on campaign promises later in the term. A story checking whether a winning candidate delivered on specific commitments is one of the most useful pieces of accountability journalism a student newsroom can produce, and it only works if someone kept track from the start.
Why this coverage matters beyond the vote count
Student government elections are often the first real experience many students have with a contested vote, a public debate, and a formal campaign, and how a student publication covers that process shapes how seriously the community takes student government as an institution. Fair, specific, verified coverage treats the election, and the students running in it, as something worth taking seriously, which is exactly the standard a newsroom should want applied to itself when it eventually covers something that matters just as much.