Election Officials Spot Ballot Printing Errors
Left 50%
Center 0%
Right 50%
1 left · 0 center · 1 right
What happened
Election officials in Washoe County, Nevada, and Fresno County, California, identified separate ballot printing errors. In Washoe County, thousands of voters received mail-in ballot return envelopes with the word "FALSE" on them; a spokesperson for the county's Registrar of Voters, George Guthrie, said the affected envelopes were "not limited to voters of any particular political party." In Fresno County, electronic ballot-marking machines at vote centers printed ballots that incorrectly labeled the Fresno Unified School District trustee race as belonging to the Fowler Unified School District. Fresno County Registrar of Voters James A. Kus said the mistake would not interfere with how ballots are counted and that those votes would still be recorded for the correct contest; the error does not appear on mail-in or on-demand printed ballots, and officials posted notices on the machines and offered voters a ballot printed on-site instead.
Sourcing check · Fully on the record · 2 articles
2 of 2 articles cite a named source for the story. It was on the record from the first report.
What these terms mean and how they're counted
- On the record · names a source 2 of 2
- On the record means the article cites a source by name for the story's main claim: a person, or an institution speaking officially, such as a company statement or a named agency's spokesperson. The opposite is an unnamed source. The count is how many of the counted articles cite at least one such source; the names are everyone named across them, each once however the articles spell it. Here: George Guthrie, James A. Kus and Bill Essayli
- Primary evidence · cites a document or data 0 of 2
- Primary evidence means the article cites a record you could check yourself: a court filing or ruling, a dataset or report, a recording or transcript, an official statement or press release, market data. A quote is not a document. The count is how many articles cite one. Here: None cited.
- Credits another outlet 0 of 2
- The article says the story comes from another outlet's reporting (“first reported by Reuters”). Those articles relay the story; they are not independent confirmation. Here: Each article presents its own reporting.
- Unnamed sources 0 of 2
- The main claim is attributed to people who are not identified: “people familiar with the matter”, “officials said”. The count is how many articles do this.
- How it developed
- When the first report landed and whether it named anyone; when the first named source and the first document appeared. Here: First report Nov 1, 23:22 UTC by New York Post, naming its source.
- Not counted 0
- Opinion, analysis and video pieces, and articles too short to assess. Every count above is out of the counted articles. An article republished under a new headline is one article.
This is about who is cited, not whether the story is true. Each source below says what it names. How we count
Omitted — what each side leaves out
Unpacked
Officials in California and Nevada flagged ballot printing mistakes, but each side's coverage reports only a single state's error. Left-leaning coverage in The Hill describes Washoe County mail return envelopes printed with the word "FALSE" and never mentions Fresno County. Right-leaning coverage in the NY Post describes California vote-center machines printing the wrong school-district name on the ballot and never mentions Nevada. A reader of only one side would see a local glitch, not separate official alerts in both states.
Left-leaning coverage highlights that the Nevada error was not limited to any particular political party. Right-leaning coverage instead puts the Fresno registrar's promise that votes will still be recorded for the right contest at the center of the story.
What caused the misprints, and has either county had to reissue ballots?
Bottom line
A NY Post reader never learns that thousands of Nevada return envelopes were misprinted. The Hill never reports that Fresno machines labeled a trustee race as the wrong school district.
The receipts — 3 facts one side's coverage lacks
- Washoe County mail-in ballot return envelopes were printed with the word FALSE
- Thousands of Washoe County voters received the affected mail-in return envelopes
- Election officials will place notices on ballot-marking devices at every Vote Center in Fresno County
The Left View
The Hill treated the Washoe County episode as a production error on return envelopes rather than a targeted problem, foregrounding officials' statement that it was "not limited to voters of any particular political party."
The Right View
The New York Post presented the Fresno machine error as a spotted defect affecting a major school-district race, while recording Kus's assurance that counting would be unaffected and that voters could avoid the machines. It then placed California election administration alongside a concurrent Justice Department effort by acting U.S. attorney Bill Essayli and Attorney General Todd Blanche to set aside ballots of up to 20,000 people and verify citizenship, quoting Essayli that "American citizen votes are being diluted" and that the situation was "an emergency," and noting a federal judge had rejected a request to halt processing those ballots because it would "wreak havoc" on the midterms.
Our Take (balanced)
The left-leaning coverage's strongest argument is the registrar's on-record claim that Washoe's "FALSE" envelopes cut across parties, which undercuts any inference of partisan targeting. The right-leaning coverage's strongest argument is the documented Fresno printout that named the wrong school district on a marked ballot—a concrete administrative failure, even with Kus's counting assurance—set against Essayli's claim that citizen votes were being "diluted." The central unresolved tension is whether these errors are contained printing glitches that leave tabulated results intact, or signs of wider unreliability in ballot production and election administration.
2 sources
More stories
The week's bottom lines, in your inbox
One email a week: the five stories that mattered and what they actually mean. Free.