Estimating the size of a gathering is an inexact science. There are techniques and best attempts that may approach accuracy, but determining how many people are attending an open event is difficult. And, typically that is not the focus of our reporting.
We cover the action, the people, the mood and, yes, the scope. But rather than counting heads, we encourage reporters to describe what they see: “Marchers filled 15 blocks,” “jammed the streets” and “packed so tightly at times that they could barely move.” Our photo and video teams add a visual layer that lets readers see for themselves.
We will usually give a rough estimate (hundreds, thousands, millions) of the crowd size based on what a location capacity is, how many people signed up for an event, what the police who are working crowd control tell us and what our reporters witness. This estimate, like those from other organizations, is not free from controversy.
In 2017, our graphics team wrote about how crowds at presidential inaugurations have been counted for the past 150 years. This piece also includes why the National Park Service no longer gives official estimates of those crowds.
When a story becomes more about the size of the crowd than about the actual event, we investigate. Our data and graphics teams report and analyze as they did in this article comparing rally sizes of the 2024 presidential candidates. The methodology at the end of the piece illustrates the work it takes to get beyond an estimate.
If you have a question for our newsroom or feedback on our coverage, please reach out here.
Susanna Timmons is an editor on the Trust team, which works to bring greater transparency to Times journalism.
The post How The Times Covers Crowds: Focusing on the Content, Not the Count appeared first on New York Times.
