Campaign reporters share different techniques for covering a presidential debate 

Scanning social media, seeking post-debate interviews, examining fundraising, and fact-checking candidates are among the many options for finding stories after a presidential debate that can push campaign coverage forward, top political reporters said Wednesday at a National Press Club panel on covering presidential debates.

"We've watched the interviews afterward on MSNBC, on C-SPAN, for what they say and get some quotes from that," said longtime political reporter Jonathan D. Salant  Salant, who has covered every presidential election since 1984 and has attended 18 national political conventions. "How are they fundraising? Sometimes they will tell you. Call the campaign, and they will tell you they raised $500,000 in the last two days after the debate."

Salant also recommended surveying social media as one of the best ways to determine what's newsworthy during a debate.

"Everyone's looking for gaffs. Sometimes you don't know until later, but again, social media will help you find out if it's a big deal," said Salant, a former Club president and currently the assistant managing editor of politics for the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.

Media scrums and spin rooms are common at presidential debates, and often, popular candidates are surrounded by the most press, making it harder for some journalists to get quotes from them. Salant says he has a "little dirty little secret" about covering these events. 

"You don't need to be there," said Salant, who has worked as a political reporter in Washington for more than three decades. "I've done both, and even if you are there, you are watching it on the television, in the press room." 

But Salant added, being there can offer the advantage of access to surrogates for quotes you might not otherwise get.

Robert Yoon, elections and democracy reporter at The Associated Press, says journalists covering campaigns should "think ahead about what [they] would ask everyone in the field" if the opportunity to engage directly with a candidate arises. 

Yoon told journalists that "demands on candidates' time are great," making it even more critical to plan ahead when covering debates. 

Prominent candidates aren't the only ones that journalists can talk to. Interviews with lesser-known candidates can also be valuable. 

"You can have full, deep conversations with some of the candidates in the back of the field," Yoon said. "That can generate a lot of useful information." 

Fact-checking politicians is important. Each panelist stressed the importance of it while sharing their experience on lessons they learned when fact-checking politicians in the field.  

Sophia Cai, a congressional reporter at Axios, recapped an interview with Republican presidential candidate Sen. Tim Scott of South Carolina, who pushed back on a question she asked about a six-week abortion ban, asking, "Would you agree with a 40-week abortion?" 

Cai said she could have followed up by asking Scott how frequently nine-month abortions happen. 

She tells a different story with former President Donald Trump, who she says lied to a group of journalists on a plane to Waco, Texas, about his first indictment charges of falsifying business records. Those charges stem from reimbursing Trump's former fixer Michael Cohen for a hush money payment to Stormy Daniels.

Yoon says having a fair model to determine misstatements during debates is vital. He says it might seem fair to give three fact-checks for each candidate when you have two people, but he argues it puts you in a box to create equivalencies when there are variations of lies. 

"By saying we're going to give candidates three for each, it may sort of look like you're equating that they were incorrect the same amount. And that can be misleading," Yoon concluded.