Policy Corner: Why we avoid 'horse-racing' election stories

We're providing coverage of the local elections starting with the June 28 primary, but we do set guidelines for ourselves on the articles we'll publish. Among the big ones is avoiding "horse-racing stories."

By that I mean poll stories, as well as those showing what endorsements candidates have gotten. Many people, especially those involved in the campaigns or who have a stake in their outcome, want to know how their favorites are doing either in the voters' eyes or those of other VIPs.

Yet are those poll results and endorsements what most of our readers want or need? We believe not. First, polls are flawed. Even the best ones have a margin of error.

Then some polls may be done poorly, with skewed questions that could influence results. Poll results don't always accurately predict election results. And there are a variety of reasons, good or not, that one VIP could endorse another.

Second, we want to help you choose candidates by giving you information on their platforms and thoughts on the matters that affect your life.

We do run fundraising stories often casting candidates "ahead" of others, but the larger point of those is to show you where their campaign money is coming from, lest it's the money steering our governments more than the leaders themselves.

You can look for more articles on suburban candidates' views - soon even in their own words in our Neighbor section - in coming weeks.