Here’s the feel-good and much-needed poll of the day, courtesy of Rasmussen:
Voters give overwhelmingly high marks to the law enforcement agencies that handled the Boston Marathon bombing and its aftermath but are less happy with the media coverage of the events. They worry, though, that the government is not focused enough on the threat of domestic Islamic terrorism.
The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 87% of Likely U.S. Voters think law enforcement agencies did a good or excellent job handling the investigation of the bombings and pursuing the suspects in the case. This includes 59% who rate their performance as excellent. Just two percent (2%) believe they did a poor job. (To see survey question wording, click here.)
It would be interesting to speak to those who didn’t think law enforcement officials did a “good” or “excellent” job responding to the bombings in Boston last week. If anything, witnessing those horrifying events unfold on live television (and later reading about them too) made it abundantly clear just how brave and selfless these men and women really are. From the gun battles to the explosions to the uncertainty of not knowing where the suspects actually were, the courage and professionalism on display during those hellish hours was nothing short of spectacular.
On the other hand, the public’s opinion of whether or not media coverage was “good” or “excellent” is decidedly mixed:
By comparison, 55% rate the way the media covered the events in Boston as good or excellent, but that includes just 21% who say they did an excellent job. Fifteen percent (15%) consider the media’s performance as poor.
Of course, there was lots of false information disseminated throughout the week, but I suppose that’s only to be expected given the nature of what happened. And yes, watching liberals insinuate without any evidence that “right-wing” extremists were somehow responsible for the atrocities was malicious and unsettling. But overall I thought the coverage (especially the local coverage) was perfectly satisfactory -- even if major networks made claims or statements they later had to retract.