Times Was Slower, but Sure, in Calling the Presidential Election

A few observations on Tuesday night's online coverage and Wednesday's print edition:

The Empire State Building was in blue lights, Mitt Romney's Boston crowd was looking despondent, and even the careful Associated Press had taken the plunge, but The Times held off late Tuesday night in declaring President Obama the winner.

Well over a half-hour after most news organizations had projected the president's re-election, The Times was holding off and attributing victory to the television networks in its major home-page headline. The A.P. made its call at 11:38 p.m.

At 12:03 a.m., I got a mobile alert with The Times itself projecting the president's re-election.

Journalism history is full of cautionary tales about ill-fated instances of jumping the gun â€" whether the famous “Dewey Defeats Truman” headline in The Chicago Tribune or, much more recently, the many newspapers and cable networks who got the presidential result s wrong in 2000.

Unlike the television networks, which depend on their combined exit polls in calling elections, The Times prefers to look at real numbers in addition to exit polls, said Janet Elder, an associate managing editor who is part of The Times's election “decision desk.”

“We have been disciplined” she said, “and it has paid off.”

Both on the Web and in print, Tuesday night and Wednesday morning, The Times had rich offerings for its viewers and readers. In typical Times fashion, it was restrained in both places, with a quiet headline that read, simply, “Obama's Night.” (For extreme contrast, one could look at The Huffington Post on Wednesday morning with its huge “¡Viva Obama!” headline, including Spanish-language exclamation points.)

I especially liked Jodi Kantor's essay in The Times about how Mr. Obama has sought a role in history â€" a smart piece of thinking ahead â€" and forward-thinking analytical pieces by Peter Baker and Carl Hulse.

Online, I enjoyed Megan Liberman's TimesCast video interviews, none more than with a quietly satisfied Nate Silver, the FiveThirtyEight blogger and statistical wizard who had the night of his life. (I couldn't help but note their good-natured and joking reference to my blog post last week on Mr. Silver's wager offer to a TV talk show host.) And I thought the front-page photograph of the Obama family was a heartwarming choice, no matter which candidate you supported. It was an inspired touch to use, as a detail, a similar photo of the family from four years ago. (For one thing, it gave everyone a chance to gauge the height differences of the Obama daughters, four years later.)

Coverage of the election â€" reasonably enough â€" drove follow-up coverage of Hurricane Sandy's damage off Wednesday's front page. But I was glad to see that the storm coverage was given plenty of space inside. That coverage included Jim Dwyer's moving About Ne w York column about the hardship in New Dorp in Staten Island.

The election is decided - causing jubilation for some and disappointment for others - but real devastation continues, especially for those who have the fewest resources.