Media Backtalk
Howard Kurtz
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, December 08, 2003; Noon ET
Consumers used to get their news from newspapers, magazines and evening broadcasts from the three television networks. Now, with the Internet, cable TV and 24-hour news networks, the news cycle is faster and more constant, with every minute carrying a new deadline. But clearly more news and more news outlets are not necessarily better. And just because the press has the ability to cover a story doesn't always mean they should -- or that they'll do it well.
Howard Kurtz has been The Washington Post's media reporter since 1990. He is also the host of CNN's "Reliable Sources" and the author of "Media Circus," "Hot Air," "Spin Cycle" and "The Fortune Tellers: Inside Wall Street's Game of Money, Media and Manipulation." Kurtz talks about the press and the stories of the day in "Media Backtalk."
The transcript follows.
Editor's Note: washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control
over Live Online discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions.
New York, N.Y.:
Howard,
Do you think in these "enlightened" times if a candidate teared up under the same circumstances as Ed Muskie did in 1972 when William Loeb, publisher of the Manchester (NH) Union Leader, attacked Mrs. Muskie, he or she would be chucked onto the dustbin, politically?
Howard Kurtz: These days, I suppose, the candidate would just go on Oprah and relive the experience and gain Sensitive Man points. Of course, Muskie's little emotional scene wasn't the only reason he lost. His once-favored campaign was struggling, and that incident became sort of a metaphor. These days, of course, more people are likely to cheer when candidates attack the press.
_______________________
Jersey City, N.J.:
Howard,
I've been hearing about all the various shakeups in programming over at MSNBC (I say "hear" because I do not watch the channel) and I can't help but wonder --- why don't they just throw in the towel? It seems like too many news channels chasing after too few viewers. Thank you.
Howard Kurtz: MSNBC still has plenty of good journalists, and some of their hosts have a following (Chris Matthews, for example). They do well during breaking-news periods (such as the war) and it's important to NBC to have a cable outlet. But these constant programming shakeups (cancelling Buchanan and Press is the latest) make even people like me wonder who's on when. Besides, if there were no MSNBC, we wouldn't get the televised version of Imus.
_______________________
Ballston, Va.:
Is it just me, Howie, or is everyone else tired of media people fawning over Hillary and asking if she's going to run in '04? I understand the Democratic horse race polls on the question, but remember that ABC also took a poll that included independents and Republicans, and she stinks it up. Do they have to fawn for five minutes, with her giggling all the way about how popular she is among Democrats? It's not exactly making Chris Wallace look like a softy.
Howard Kurtz: I'm really tired of reporters and pundits pushing the whole Hillary scenario when she's made it quite clear she's not going to run in '04. And yes, it got a little too giggly on some of the Sunday shows (and the anchors knew full well she wasn't going to change her answer). Yes, the polls show she could get in tomorrow and waltz to the Democratic nomination, but she is also a polarizing figure in this country who would have a rough road to the White House. All of which hasn't stopped some journalists from salivating over the prospect of a Hillary candidacy.
_______________________
Philadelphia, Pa.:
Why did CNN Late Edition pull the plug on the roundtable segment? I think that is a mistake considering we're entering a presidential election. I personally would have a roundtable of Steve Roberts, Susan Page, and Ron Brownstein like they used to do. I think you need to have objective analysis of what's going on after you have politicians and hacks spinning events during the show. What do you think?
Howard Kurtz: I like roundtables myself, if the panelists are good, and I'm not sure why Late Edition did that (actually the last incarnation consisted of Roberts, Page, Johah Goldberg and Peter Beinart). It's a two-hour show, after all. ABC's This Week, as you probably know, recently did the same thing, arguing that it was time to do something different in an era when pundits sling opinions on cable 24/7.
_______________________
New York, N.Y.:
How true is the wide perception (and my perception) that the news media suffers from a pack mentality? Or to put it another way, how often do people repeat a story without doing their own due dilegence to confirm it?
Howard Kurtz: Pack journalism is alive and well and stronger than ever. It's not that the second, third and fourth wave of reporters don't make the necessary phone calls and check their facts, it's that so many otherwise talented reporters wind up doing the same thing and saying the same thing. This is certainly true of the Kobe/Laci/Jacko type stories, but in political coverage as well. At the beginning of the year, nearly everyone in the press said John Kerry was the front-runner. Now nearly everyone says it's Dean. All before anyone has cast a single vote.
_______________________
Louisville, Ky.:
Re Muskie possibly crying in 1972 (some said it was melting snow on his face):
How likely is it that Kerry's F word won't be a big deal at all? Four years after 1972, Carter's "lusted in my heart" comment really didn't make a difference.
Howard Kurtz: From where I sit, Kerry's colorful language hasn't created much of a ripple, though Andrew Card said on Late Edition yesterday that it was "beneath" the senator. (What Kerry told Rolling Stone was that he didn't realize Bush would BLANK it up so badly in Iraq.) But none of this is surprising to anyone who read about or listened to the Nixon tapes released in 1974.
_______________________
Bethesda, Md.:
Howard,
In half an hour of watching MSNBC one day last week, the network posted a question for viewers along the lines of "Is the Michael Jackson investigation beginning to fail?", and then their 'political expert' (I think with the last name of Press) advised that (1) the Democratic nomination will likely be won by H. Dean, (2) it was a good decision by Pres. Bush to waive the steel tariff (without mentioning that it was Bush who imposed it) and (3) "Rush" (whom he could have called, say, Mr. Limbaugh) hasn't fully gotten over drugs and thinks the investigation is a witchhunt.
My question is: How should I react to a supposed "news" organization that seems decidely to favor telling us what their OPINIONS are instead of reporting NEWS? I respect the print media much more than the electronic media which I fear is doing it all it can to stifle the ideals of journalism in a democracy in favor of ratings. Is it time for bread and circuses?
Thanks.
Howard Kurtz: If the commentator in question was Bill Press, he is a guy who's paid to have opinions. He and other cable commentators would be comparable to columnists in newspapers. They are not pretending to offer straight news reports, and I think viewers can tell the difference. Not that all these opinions necessarily make sense, but you need to take them with major spoonfuls of salt.
_______________________
DeSoto, Tex.:
Why in publishing Dean's refusal to make Gubernatorial Records public, do we not expose our President's efforts to protect his Gubernatorial records for now and always in his Dad's Library?
Howard Kurtz: I've seen that mentioned in several stories, along with the outcome, which is that the presidential-library proposal didn't fly.
_______________________
Dryden, N.Y.:
Chris Wallace was truly fair and balanced.
He definitely will replace Russsert as my Sunday morning political hit. Does he mark a departure from Fox's usual spin to attract a more liberal audience among which I proudly count myself? He was an equal opportunity interviewer, closely and fairly grilling both Dean and Card.
Howard Kurtz: I thought Wallace was fair as well, but it will take him more than one week to prove himself. He was an interesting choice for Fox because he is so clearly a newsman, not an ideologue or former political spinner (his predecessor, Tony Snow, was a conservative columnist who worked in the first Bush White House). I don't think Fox is chasing liberal viewers so much as that it's broadening its base and trying to win some respect as a news organization.
_______________________
Raleigh, N.C.:
Charles Krauthammer recently wrote in a column,
"Chris Matthews: Would you break up Fox?
Howard Dean: On ideological grounds, absolutely yes, but...I don’t want to answer whether I would break up Fox or not...what I’m going to do is appoint people to the FCC that believe democracy depends on getting information from all portions of the political spectrum, not just one."
This looks pretty awful, but those of us aware of the mendacity in modern journalism are drawn to the ellipsis. So we go to the online transcript and find,
MATTHEWS: Would you break up Fox?
(LAUGHTER)
MATTHEWS: I’m serious.
DEAN: I’m keeping a...
MATTHEWS: Would you break it up? Rupert Murdoch has “The Weekly Standard.” It has got a lot of other interests. It has got “The New York Post.” Would you break it up?
DEAN: On ideological grounds, absolutely yes, but...
(LAUGHTER)
MATTHEWS: No, seriously. As a public policy, would you bring industrial policy to bear and break up these conglomerations of power?
DEAN: I don’t want to answer whether I would break up Fox or not, because, obviously
(CROSSTALK)
MATTHEWS: Well, how about large media enterprises?
DEAN: Let me-yes, let me get...
(LAUGHTER)
DEAN: The answer to that is yes.
I would say that there is too much penetration by single corporations in media markets all over this country. We need locally-owned radio stations. There are only two or three radio stations left in the state of Vermont where you can get local news anymore. The rest of it is read and ripped from the AP.
MATTHEWS: So what are you going to do about it? You’re going to be president of the United States, what are you going to do?
DEAN: What I’m going to do is appoint people to the FCC that believe democracy depends on getting information from all portions of the political spectrum, not just one.
Now, when an op-ed writer uses the ellipsis to completely change the meaning of an exchange and (unintentionally ironically) calls into question someone else's mental stability, can you tell my why I should ever trust the writer again? Or why a presumably reputable paper (why, look here, WaPo Writer's Group!!) would employ him?
I just don't think should be my responsibility, as a reader, to fact check on that level.
Howard Kurtz: Some ellipses are justified, but it probably would have been better if the joking nature of the break-up-Fox answer had been mentioned.
_______________________
Annandale, Va.:
Howard,
Presidential elections frequently play to the wings in the primary season and then jump to the center after the convention (or when the nomination is won.)
Will Dean/Kerry/Edwards/Clark have to revise or correct their hard left rhetoric to avoid being McGovern II and if so, can we expect the press to remind us of previous statements?
Howard Kurtz: I don't buy your premise that the Democrats you named are using "hard left" rhetoric, but there's little question that Howard Dean, who was a moderate governor of Vermont, has presented himself as something of a liberal crusader, especially on the war. Almost all candidates move toward the center after securing the nomination, and the press usually isn't shy about pointing that out.
_______________________
Venice Beach, Calif.:
How would you rank the following stories in terms of their impact on the world (and why): Michael Jackson, Iraq, and tax cuts?
Howard Kurtz: Michael Jackson, the most important by far. Why else would cable be making such a big deal about it?
_______________________
RE: Colorful Language:
Can you say how much editing goes on WRT reporting the actual language used by interview subjects (those not caught on real-time formats, that is)
How much profanity, how many 'uh's, how many grammatical mistakes are removed from the writeup of an interview?
Howard Kurtz: Uh's and slight verbal stumbles are often taken out, otherwise quotes would be, um, virtually, ah, unreadable. But beyond that they're not supposed to be changed in any way. If there's a profanity that can't be published, I'd either use an ellipsis or that old reliable, [expletive.]
_______________________
Bethesda, Md.:
A follow up to my earlier question and your response: If Bill Press is an opinion person rather than a journalist, shouldn't MSNBC put up a banner saying that he is expressing opinion?
Also, where does a network get off with a poll question like "Is the investigation of Michael Jackson running out of gas?" Shouldn't news organizations report news rather than ask loaded questions that suggest bias? Thanks.
Howard Kurtz: I hate on-screen questions that ask the audience a factual question that they have no way of knowing the answer to, or to which there is no clear answer. Actually, I hate all on-screen questions, because they prompt people to "vote" on the network's Web site, and the results are read on the air, despite the fact that they're totally unscientific and therefore useless.
_______________________
Arlington, Va.:
I'm going to bite my tongue and give myself some time to warm up to Chris Wallace, even though I already miss Tony Snow. But personalities aside, am I the only one who thinks the revamped Fox News Sunday set and visuals look terrible? Between the new design, which seems FAR too busy and uninspired, and the lighting, which was simply poor, the broadcast had all the charm and professionalism of, oh, the local news broadcast from Buffalo. (No offense to Buffalo.)
If I'm the only one who feels this way, okay, fine - I'll just go find a new Sunday program to watch. But PLEASE tell me it's not just me...
Howard Kurtz: This is just one man's opinion, but I thought the graphics looked fine. No self-respecting show would trot out a new host without new whiz-bang graphics.
_______________________
Washington, D.C.:
It apppears that the Today Show is losing its grip as the morning news leader. What has ABC done, in your opinion, to close the gap?
Howard Kurtz: I just think Diane Sawyer and Charlie Gibson are a really good team (remember, they were originally just going to fill in for a year or so) and they've obviously got some smart producers over there. It's hard to stay on top for as many years as Today has without the competition figuring out a way to make inroads.
_______________________
Torrance, Calif.:
Whitehouse spokesman told us the story of how the President's surprise Thanksgiving day vist to our troops in Iraq was nearly called off due to an incidental contact with a British Airways flight. Brithish Airways has denied this. What is the real story here?
Howard Kurtz: I have trouble keeping track. First the WH said it happened, then that it didn't happen. Last week, The Post's Dana Milbank reported what he called Version 3.0:
Press secretary Scott McClellan said that the aircraft inquiring about Air Force One was, in fact, "a non-UK operator." The spokesman said there had been a British Airways plane "that was in the vicinity of Air Force One as it was crossing over for a good portion of that flight." The presidential pilots thought the query "was coming from a pilot with a British accent, and so that's why they had concluded that it was a British Airways plane."
The White House released a statement from Britain's air traffic service confirming that a "non-UK operator" radioed the control center in Swanwick, England, at "0930 Zulu" time to ask if the aircraft behind it was Air Force One.
_______________________
Fly-over-land, WI:
Howard,
Last week the CBS affiliate in the Dallas/Fort Worth area ran a story about federal authorities investigating efforts by white supremacist and anti-government groups to develop a sodium cyanide bomb. Investigators have seized bomb components, machine guns, and a half-million rounds of ammunition.
Maybe I've missed something over the past couple of days, but I don't think the national media has picked up this story, preferring instead to prattle on about Michael Jackson's legal troubles.
Can it be that, like the folks who bomb abortion clinics, white supremacist groups don't fit the media's definition of what a terrorist looks like, and hence, don't provoke the kind of coverage they would if it was an Islamic or Arab trying to do these things?
Howard Kurtz: I confess that I was unaware of this story. Stories about investigators stopping a potential terrorist plot often don't get the attention they deserve, considering what could happen if the plot continued unchecked. No dramatic video, no big-name suspects. Of course, two-bit arrests are sometimes hyped by officials, but this one sounds pretty serious, based on the seizing of bomb components.
_______________________
Re: Pack journalism:
It is now 30 years since the Crouse book The Boys on the Bus. Is that too long ago to affect how journalists today work? I assume that since you cover politics and the media that you've read it, but most assumptions are dumb. Have you? Do you think many of the people you cover have?
Howard Kurtz: Every reporter who was more than 12 years old at the time read that book, and it was tremendously influential. At the time, there were no media columnists or cable shows or Web sites where the media's performance was debated and excoriated. These days, we have the benefit of nonstop media criticism (and lots of other books on the media). Of course, today you could never get away with a title that ignored the girls on the bus.
_______________________
Harlem, N.Y.:
I'm tired of hearing about we supporters of Al Sharpton being treated as if we were marginal voters at best. Al understands what we simple folk are looking for by way of our leaders. Leave it to the lilly white, K Street folks in D.C. to denegrate what I think has been a very successful candidacy thus far. Please apologize. Thanks.
Howard Kurtz: I don't think anyone is denigrating Sharpton's supporters, and some pieces (including a profile I wrote a few months ago) have definitely credited him with surprising people with his wit and more restrained rhetoric in this campaign. At the same time, journalists can't ignore some of the New York racial controversies Sharpton was involved in, or the fact that he's raised little money and has almost no chance of winning the Democratic nomination. But he has succeeded in changing his image somewhat.
_______________________
Speaking of the Thanksgiving Iraq Visit...:
I have read reports that the momentarily famous picture of Mr. Bush holding the Thanksgiving tutkey was actually faked in some way, and that he was actually holding a prop. If so, doesn't this raise some serious concerns?
Howard Kurtz: Opinions vary on that. It was The Post's Mike Allen who reported last week that the president had picked up a turkey platter that was meant as a decoration, not the food being served to the troops. Some folks say that perfectly captures the staged, photo-op quality of the visit; others find it a turkey of a story and say it doesn't matter what tray Bush was holding because he clearly boosted the morale of the troops.
_______________________
Arlington, Va.:
What difference does it make if someone "made" Air Force One en route to Baghdad?
Howard Kurtz: Probably none, other than that White House communications director Dan Bartlett had given that dramatic detail to reporters and the British quickly disputed it.
_______________________
Mt. Lebanon, Pa.:
Sunday 10 a.m. -- I turn on FOX NEWS to find out about the US killing of Afghan children. Nada. Zip. Not a thing.
I went online thinking maybe NPR mis-stated the situation on the radio. I looked up the Washington Post, the LA Times, and the NY Times. They all had it has a front page story. Even my hometown Anchorage Daily News had it on their top 24 hour news sidebar.
But FOX devoting it's first 30 minutes of coverage on terrorism and the war on Iraq didn't mention Afghanistan. I'd a thought a story from the original terrorism site -- Afghanistan -- would have screamed for attention from FOX.
FOX NEWS. Fair and Balanced. Bull nuggets.
Thanks much.
Howard Kurtz: Certainly seems like a big story to me. But it's also possible that Fox had reported it either before or after you tuned in.
_______________________
Arlington, Va.:
Howard, you're constantly making apologies for blatant White House and Bush falsehoods, the latest being the story about the British Airways jetliner seeing Air Force One. Why don't you just simply say "The White House was lying again" and just get it over with.
Howard Kurtz: Because I have no proof that the White House was lying. In fact, based on the latest account I mentioned earlier, it looks like some version of the event did happen but that the White House screwed up the details. Where the White House did lie, as I reported at the time, was in feeding reporters the false story that Bush would be spending Thanksgiving at the ranch as a way of preserving the secrecy of the Baghdad trip. Many people are giving the White House a pass on that, but it still troubles me.
_______________________
Easley, S.C.:
re: Kerry's colorful language and Card's reaction: It's not like President Bush has never dropped an f-bomb (e.g., "We're going to f------ take Saddam out") or other colorful language ("That Adam Clymer is a major league a------.") So really the White House is behaving in a whiney manner over this thing.
Howard Kurtz: I couldn't give a [blank]. The only interesting question is whether Kerry was trying to pander to Rolling Stone's readers, who are presumably quite familiar with such language.
_______________________
Washington, D.C.:
Howard,
I saw over the weekend that the NRA was looking to see if it could declare itself a news outlet to skirt campaign finance laws. My question is, is this possible? Are there other issue groups that have this status?
Howard Kurtz: I don't know. It sounds like a stretch to me. But you never know what clever lawyers can come up with. This was at the heart of the campaign finance debate: Could you write a law that would limit the influence of special interests without those interests finding new ways around the prohibitions?
_______________________
Alexandria, Va.:
Howard,
I wanted to just say that the Post has been doing a good job in following the developments at the National Zoo. Do you think more national outlets will pick up on a story that shows the shameful mistreatment and abuse of animals that are nominally under the federal government? I can turn this into a rant against the Bush administration, but instead I will just say that it is reporters like Grimaldi, Barker, and Cohn that make the Post a great newspaper. Thank you. washingtonpost.com:
Key Staffers Depart Zoo During Push for Reforms (Post, Dec. 8)
Howard Kurtz: Thanks. It seems to have gotten a good bit of coverage on the morning shows. It is ultimately a local story, but is also a shame because the zoo is so popular here and there's so much community goodwill toward that institution.
_______________________
San Diego, Calif.:
While well into my 40's, I find myself having a renewed interest in politics. Oftentimes newspapers are mentioned as having a certain political bias by TV pundits. How can I distinguish what paper leans which way and do you think a certain bias runs throughout an organization's stories? I.e. do editors consistently edit towards a paper's point of view?
Howard Kurtz: You should make up your own mind rather than relying on TV pundits, who generally have their own biases. Newspapers are not supposed to be edited toward a particular point of view (except on the editorial pages). That's not to say that bias doesn't sometimes creep in, or mistakes made, or differing points of view overlooked. One thing you can do is compare your local paper to some national news outlet you believe to be reliable, and see if you find a pattern of differences. Everyone should be his or her own media critic these days.
Thanks for the chat, folks.
_______________________
Automatically Update Page
Get New Responses
Submit Question
| 
