Prof. Aseem Prakash on The Washington Post's Monkey Cage blog, "Here’s what many journalists missed when covering the Brexit vote"

Profs. Aseem Prakash and Nives Dolšak highlight that many incorrectly predicted the Brexit vote and post-vote, the narratives used to explain why Brexit was chosen.

The Brexit vote surprised many observers. Most pollsters and financial analysts incorrectly predicted the final outcome. Since the vote, we’ve seen two main media narratives about what happened. On the one hand, some reported that the pro-Brexit vote was driven by factors such as xenophobia, racism, and misinformation about the economic costs of leaving the EU. Others  suggest that the vote reflects anxiety about jobs and the loss of British identity and autonomy that comes with European economic, political, and cultural integration. In addition to emphasizing different information about voters’ decisions, these two narratives usually imply different political positions: one critical, the other positive.

For the full post, please click here.