In case you missed it, as conflicting speculation about a Christie presidential run continues -- see this story versus this story -- I wrote an article for today's Inquirer about whether the governor is complicit in the confusion:
SIMI VALLEY, Calif. - The speech that could have clarified it all did anything but.
In front of 1,000 devoted Republicans, a national TV audience, and Nancy Reagan herself in the front row, Gov. Christie could have said Tuesday night: "I am not running for president in 2012."
Instead, the surging non-candidate-of-the-moment charmed, joked, and answered the "Will you run?" question by referring the audience at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library and Museum to an online video compilation of his previous declarations against running.
That answer - coupled with a string of recent news stories featuring unnamed sources saying Christie either was not running or was possibly reconsidering a run - was interpreted differently across the media.
The Wall Street Journal's headline, "After Christie Speech, Answer Still 'no'," and the Christian Science Monitor's "Christie Tells California Audience He Won't Enter 2012 Presidential Race" conflicted with Yahoo's assertion that Christie "hints he might reconsider" and Politico's conclusion that "Christie Leaves 2012 Run Question Open." According to Slate, he ducked the question.
Such journalistic confusion is not a reflection of poor reporting, says pollster Patrick Murray of Monmouth University. It is being sowed by the Christie camp and perpetuated by the evasiveness of Christie's recent remarks.
Read the rest of the story, here.