I mention earlier that the Washington Post hasn't updated their election statistics. It's not just the Post. Here's the New York Times election map, which has the same erroneous 62M votes for Obama that WaPo has. So does Politico. Real Clear Politics has the 2.8% number. Fox News has 62M Obama votes. And CBS News. CNN, at least, takes a middle ground. They haven't updated, but they don't feature a national vote total that I could find, and each of their state totals includes the date and time it was last updated. That's not great (they're some 2M votes behind in California, for example, and there's no hint from what I'm seeing that CA was counting slowly), but it's something, I suppose.
Where to get good info? Huffington Post is a bit behind, but not much (they have 65.0M votes for Obama, compared with Wasserman's 65.5M). You know who is accurate? Wikipedia is currently updated to Wasserman's latest changes.
What I believe happened here is that the AP stopped updating at some point, about a week in, and all of these news organizations were counting on it. So some of this may be on the AP. On the other hand, at the very least they have a responsibility to clearly label what's going on.
Because what these news organizations are doing is supplying incorrect information.
There's really no excuse for that. If they're locked in to what the AP does, then they need to at least post a large label indicating when it was last updated, and something about what they know beyond that. And reconsider their plans for the next cycle.
Granted, there's not a whole lot at stake in whether Obama's lead is 3.5M (what WaPo and the others have) or 4.7M and rising (the actual number). But news organizations should get basic facts right.