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."
Howard Kurtz
(washingtonpost.com)
|
|
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.
_____________
Minneapolis, Minn.:
Why is there no focus on exactly why we still have a battle for control of Fallujah? Is that the genius if embedding reporters--so we talk about the battle itself instead of the reason we still have to fight these battles?
Howard Kurtz: I've seen some good newspaper stories on how the Bush administration delayed the assault until after the election, and the reason that the insurgency movement has grown so strong and is concentrated in that area. But I think the focus on the presidential campaign was so overwhelming in recent weeks that Iraq and Fallujah were almost relegated to back-burner status, except insofar as they affected the campaign.
_______________________
Iowa:
Was there any aspect of the conventional wisdom that survived this election intact? The incombent below 50 percent, the high turnout helps Dems, the debates will matter greatly? (Even the Redskins curse went by the wayside.)
Howard Kurtz: Well, the debates did help Kerry a great deal, just not enough. But if I had a dime for everytime I heard or read someone say, "undecideds always break for the challenger," I'd be rich. (The usual rules didn't apply because this election was different in so many ways.) It was sort of like that rule that the candidate with the most money at the end of the previous year always wins the nomination--that is, until Howard Dean and his $40 million failed to win it.
_______________________
Alexandria, Va.:
Howard, regarding the network projections-- as Media Critic do you feel the networks were correct or incorrect in making sure no candiate had over 270 votes on Wednesday morning?
I can understand the reluctance of CNN, ABC, and CBS to call Ohio during that time frame. But once Fox and NBC called Ohio giving Bush 269, they didn't call anything else. Nevada and New Mexico could have been easily called (like the others did). It was like they did not want to be the ones to declare Bush had 270.
What is your opinion on this. Were they right to do it after their experience of 4 years ago, or should have they called Nevada and New Mexico regardless of their opinion in Ohio?
Howard Kurtz: Tom Brokaw has acknowledged that once NBC got Bush to 269 by calling Ohio, it didn't want to call any more states and be in the position of declaring who had won the election. Even though other nets were calling Nevada for Bush beginning around 3:45 a.m., NBC and Fox did not call another state until Kerry conceded at 11. Fox denies that it didn't put Bush over 270 out of any nervousness, saying that those other states were too close to call. After the 2000 fiasco, no one wanted to get it wrong, especially on the biggest call of all.
_______________________
McLean, Va.:
Hello Mr. Kurtz --
I just wanted to thank you for posting the link to the Daily Mirror front page. I own a t-shirt shop and that front page has become my instant best seller. I sold over 100 of them just over this past weekend. Thanks again and keep up the good work.
Howard Kurtz: Virginia may be a red state, but there must be some diehard blue-staters among your customers...
_______________________
Springfield, Va.:
Howard... The White House press corps does copmrise women and minorities, right? I started counting at no. 3 during the press conference. No. 3 being the third white man in a row called on by the president. It wasn't until No. 9 that a minority, a Chinese or Chinese-American man, was called on and then there were another three white men called on before a woman was able to ask a question. I'm not a knee-jerk feminist by any stretch and often I'm lazy about noticing these things. But it just jumped out at me watching the news conference. Of course maybe I was trying to take my mind of the absurdities coming out of the president's mouth, but nevertheless, I took notice and it seemed wrong. What happened?
Howard Kurtz: Sometimes it depends on who is there for a given press conference. The New York Times, Boston Globe, Newsweek and CNN and NBC, among others, have women covering the White House. There are fewer minorities, but they are there, including an Asian-American at the L.A. Times. But the White House is not as glamorous a beat as it's been deemed in the past, especially with all the travel, so some talented people may be shying away from it.
_______________________
Frederick, Md.:
I've never seen so many conflicting versions of a story such a Yasar Arafat. First, he's dead, then he's not dead. Next, he's in a coma, then he's not in a coma. Now there's the conflicts with the life support, who owns him, and where will he be buried. To top it off, the US media is gullible enough to print everything!
Howard Kurtz: I can't figure out what's going on either, but no American publication that I know of has said Arafat is dead. Television viewers may have gotten that impression when, as I wrote last week, a Washington Times reporter asked Bush at his news conference about a report that Arafat had died. This was an AP bulletin attributed to the prime minister of Luxenbourg--I never did figure out how he was supposed to have known--that was overtaken minutes later by official denials.
_______________________
Austin, Tex.:
Howard,
Why has the mainstream media held off the reports of
voter fraud/machine errors in Ohio and Florida? Extra
votes, backward counting machines, and exit polls that
are wildly inaccurate in swing states only make for a might
suspicious election in my mind.
Is the media holding off on this story until it's more
convincing or am I just a paranoid liberal elitist who is so
overwhelmed by my liberal elitistness that I no longer
have any ability to analyze facts into a cohesive argument
that isn't biased.
...or both?
Howard Kurtz: I'm not qualified to pass judgment on the degree of your paranoia, but while I've read some reports of scattered voting problems in states such as Florida and Ohio, things went much more smoothly than many had expected. More important, Bush had a comfortable enough edge in those states that the problems that have been reported or alleged would not have changed the result. And that is a far different situation, needless to say, than four years ago.
_______________________
Lafayette, La.:
Would you comment on television media's coverage of Bush's second-term agenda since the election? It seems to me that an awful lot of hard questions are being asked now that should have been asked BEFORE the election, when they might have greatly benefitted the voting public. Interestingly, these questions are being aired at the same polls are being conducted as to whether or not the viewing public thinks media coverage of the election was biased. It's as though CNN, MSNBC, etc., are using those polls to convince themselves they didn't do anything wrong.
Thanks!
Howard Kurtz: I must be on a different wavelength here. A good part of the campaign was devoted to what Bush's second-term agenda would be, or even whether he had one. Kerry making charges, for example, that Bush would cut Social Security benefits through privatization and bring back the draft. Bush talked about tax reform during the campaign (though not all that much) and has been pushing tort reform for four years. Naturally, once a candidate wins there's a renewed focus on what he's going to attempt in the next four years, whether he can get it passed and how he's going to pay for it.
_______________________
Houston, Tex.:
Why was Bush's recent press conference held in the Old Executive Office Building instead of the White House?
Howard Kurtz: Most presidential news conferences are held in the Old EOB because it's a much bigger and grander space compared to the cramped White House pressroom, although in nice weather the sessions are sometimes held in the Rose Garden.
_______________________
Anonymous:
Howard, I was shocked that the President actually held a news conference last week. Is this an indication that we can expect more such encounters in the second term?
Howard Kurtz: Ummm... I wouldn't hold my breath, not after Bush set a record for the fewest news conferences of the television age. It's traditional for a reelected president to hold one. I've never fully understand the president's distaste for the format, since he usually does pretty well, is able to play the press as a foil, and looks more comfortable than when he reads a formal speech.
_______________________
Winston-Salem, N.C.:
Do you think that, rightly or wrongly, Hillary Clinton as a candidate for president in 2008 is a non-starter? It seems to me that most of the pundits and even democratic spokespersons are leaning away from northeasterners...and I can imagine a TV campaign against Hillary that would make the swift boat adds look like an episode of the Wiggles.
Howard Kurtz: She is the instant front-runner because of her popularity in the party and tenure as first lady. It's also true that Hillary is a polarizing figure in much of the country and would suffer from the northeast liberal label (even though she's actually from Chicago and has tried to moderate her record since she's been in the Senate). A major question is what other Democrats will be running in '08, and it's a bit early to answer that.
_______________________
Norfolk, Va.:
Howie - Philosophically, do you or other chatters see a problem with Newsweek's special section reporters promising Presidential candidates that they will not disclose anything before the election , in exchange for access? It just doesn't pass the sniff test. Thanks.
Howard Kurtz: That's not any different from what authors do when they're writing a book. My understanding is that, at least in the past, Newsweek uses different reporters for the book project than the campaign trail correspondents who are churning out stuff for the magazine.
_______________________
Washington, D.C.:
Following up on the voter fraud question - Just because the the results won't necessarily change is no reason not to investigate. This is what we depend on a free press for 'cause we sure as hell can't depend on the government to do it. What about the evidence of a disproportinate number of punch card machines in minority districts in Ohio and New Mexico? Those machines result in a much higher number of "spoiled" ballots that are tossed out. Do you really think those machines are placed where they are by accident? C'mon Howard, there's a story out there and someone should be investigating it.
Howard Kurtz: I didn't say it shouldn't be investigated.
_______________________
Bethesda, Md.:
Had 70,000 votes gone the other way in Ohio, and Kerry had been elected, would we now be hearing about how Rove was an idiot, how the Kerry campaign got it all right, how the evangelicals played little role, etc.? In other words, in a close election, can it really be all one way or the other?
Howard Kurtz: I made that point in this morning's column and it's been one of my pet peeves. Bush clearly won, but it's not like he trounced Kerry. Had Kerry managed to carry Ohio, everything you're now reading about the red state of America and the futility of the Democratic Party would be turned on its head. Naturally, there are serious questions to be asked about a party that has now lost five of seven presidential elections, and congressional seats in the last two contests. But some of these apocalyptic pieces are overblown.
_______________________
Washington, D.C.:
Mr. Kurtz:
How does the appointment of a new editor of the Post, as you reported, change how your newsroom does business? Or does is matter that much?
Howard Kurtz: As the No. 2 editor, the managing editor is a very important person around here. I'm sure Phil Bennett will make his impact felt. The outgoing managing editor, Steve Coll, pushed major projects, more television, music and other pop-culture stories for the front page and was heavily involved in the Web site.
_______________________
New York, N.Y. [True Blue]:
Howard,
In last week's issue of "The New Republic" Michelle Cottle quotes former White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer as dismissing the role of "The Fourth Estate." He said that the media has no special role, but is, rather, just "one of several constituencies to deal with... [one which is not] more important" than any other.
Isn't the press's adversarial role a major keystone to our democracy and sometimes the only true represenatative in questioning power?
Howard Kurtz: All depends on your point of view. Journalists would tend to agree. Our view is that we're not asking questions of public figures and checking records and writing stories to feed our egos, but as the representatives of a public that doesn't have the access that we have. The Bush administration, however, tends to see the media as a self-interested, self-promoting special interest group and sees little reason to go out of its way to cater to journalists. There's a push and pull between every president and the press, of course.
_______________________
Iowa:
Your comment about newspaper endorsements affecting 3-4 votes was spot on. Even though Sen. Kerry was endorsed by substantially more newspapers, including 30+ that switched from their 2000 endorsement of Bush, it mattered not a whit. Or maybe it's a case of people simply not reading papers in the red states, rather than ignoring the endorsements (which in some cases were very well-written and clearly agonized over).
Howard Kurtz: Well, it may have moved a few votes. And people were reading these endorsements: The Chicago Tribune got 1,200 cancellations after backing Bush. Papers that switched from Bush in '00 to Kerry this time also got an earful from disgruntled readers. But in the larger scheme of things, I don't know how much impact these endorsements had. The situation is very different in state and local races, where a strong endorsement can, and often does, put one candidate over the top.
_______________________
Uninformed Media Junkies:
As the media man, don't you get tired (in these chats and otherwise) of folks constantly complaining to you: "How come the Post refuses to cover X,Y, and Z!;?" when the Post is very clearly covering X,Y, and Z?
Do you find that more and more, people see what they want to in the media and refuse to see that which contradicts their already ossified opinions?
Also, how come your refuse to cover this story!;?
Howard Kurtz: Look, everyone in America is a media critic, and sometimes the objections raised by chat participants, e-mailers and others are spot on. But it does get a bit tiring when people who clearly don't read the paper every day say why do you refuse to cover such-and-such a story--even sometimes when I've written about such-and-such a week or two earlier.
_______________________
New York, N.Y.:
To follow up on a recent question -- do you do or do you don't feel that Bush's 'mandate' has been overstated? The margin was small, and if it had been a Democratic win under similar standards, I suspect that there would have been a flurry of stories on how Kerry should consider a bipartisan approach.
Howard Kurtz: Well, there has also been a flurry of stories on whether Bush should consider a bipartisan approach. He clearly has more of a mandate than in 2000 and less than a landslide winner. But what pundits say about a mandate or lack thereof doesn't matter much. It's how the president assesses his political position, and how far he feels he can push his agenda, that ultimately will determine how the second term plays out.
_______________________
Springfield, Va.:
Is it ever appropriate for a reporter to participate in a political event? I ask because a friend of mine sent me a "news story" about an LA Times reporter (Brownstein) participating in a forum to discuss "the road back" for the Democratic Party.
Howard Kurtz: Journalists do forums all the time. How is that any different than, say, being interviewed on TV? As long as the forum is sponsored by some group that's not partisan on either side, I don't see a problem.
_______________________
Midland, Mich.:
I keep hearing that GWB has a "mandate" because he won the popular vote, and particularly it is mentioned that he got more votes than any presidential candidate in history. (Who got the second most votes in history? John Kerry.)
Before 2000, a 51 percent re-election and 286 electoral votes would have been a real "squeaker." So which is it, squeaker or mandate?
Howard Kurtz: Again, there's no constitutional definition of mandate. If you know by 11 am the next day who won, the election is close but not quite a squeaker, at least compared to a 36-day recount.
_______________________
Richmond, Va.:
Do you think that the press will be harder on the Bush administration in its second term? The accepted wisdom seems to be that the press "gave Bush a pass" and did not question him/his advisors enough or pursue the tough stories. Or do you think that it is too difficult given the administrations secrecy? Do you think any really big story will break this time around due to some intense investigative journalism?
Howard Kurtz: The "accepted wisdom"? Accepted by whom? The press may have been somewhat easier on Bush after 9/11 and during the runup to the Iraq war. But I don't think anyone can seriously argue that Bush has gotten a pass from the media during the past year, especially with Abu Ghraib and the continuing drumbeat of bad news from Iraq. Even Kerry aides I asked about this weren't making that case. They do say, as I quoted Joe Lockhart today, that the press largely expected Bush to win and that this colored the coverage of Kerry.
_______________________
Freeport, N.Y.:
Thanks for taking questions. Is it just me or is it not true that the media actually "campaigns" for both candidates by airing their ads (and those of the 527s) during talk/news shows? Wouldn't it be prudent for the media, in the future, to refrain from giving free airplay to each side? This week's Newsweek look at both campaigns describes the glee each campaign took in getting their "messages" across for free...it seems to me the media is more than willing to be a patsy for the propaganda machines. Your thoughts?
Howard Kurtz: As someone who covered the campaign advertising, you can't simply ignore it. You have to report it and fact-check it and analyze it and, in the case of television, show it. TV has adopted the technique of putting the ad being scrutinized in a box, as opposed to full screen, so it's clear that it's just an element being discussed. Besides, the number of times that 527 ads (or candidate ads, for that matter) were shown on news shows is a mere blip compared to how many times they ran as paid advertising. The pro-Kerry Media Fund, for example, spent $60 million on ads, and the pro-Bush Progress for America spent $15 million just on its last ad, the one of the president hugging the girl who'd lost her mother at the World Trade Center.
_______________________
Bethesda, Md.:
"Moral value issues" seemed to rank high in the exit polls on election day. Was the question asked in a way that wouuld suggest to the voter that it was an issue or did the people just respond ithout the suggestion. What is the definition of "moral value issues" for election purposes? Was it a code word which meant "we opposed gay marriage and abortion" or was it all religious "morale value issues" that Christians believe in like "helping the poor, not cheating in business, love they neighbor as thyself, etc".
Howard Kurtz: The thing about "moral values" is that it wasn't defined. It could be a code phrase for abortion or gay rights, or could be viewed more broadly, depending on the person answering the question. Keep in mind that when moral values was listed with some other choices in those exit polls, it was chosen by 22 percent of respondents as their top issue, compared to 20 percent for jobs/economy. But when people were asked during the campaign in poll after poll to name their most important issue, without prompting, moral issues were not in the top 3 or 4.
_______________________
Winston-Salem, N.C.:
I'd submit that there is definition creep with respect to the term "mandate". This term used to be used in response to the importance of certain policies in achieving an election victory. What was Bush's policy mandate?
Howard Kurtz: You can usually claim some kind of mandate for the issues you campaigned on. Therefore, Bush can say that the country elected him knowing that he wanted to create private Social Security accounts or stay the course in Iraq or name conservative judges to the bench. If he pushes an issue he didn't talk about in the campaign, it would be hard to argue he has any kind of mandate for that.
_______________________
Aspen Hill, Md.:
Howard - Maybe its just me, but it really seems that some Democrats are not dealing well with Bush's win last week. Some of their comments indicate an unwillingness to address why they lost so many races. Nancy Pelosi's statement that Americans who voted for Bush were "exploited" by his campaign is both denigrating to the millions who voted for him, and defensive in that she seems to be trying to ignore what the electorate is saying. Maureen Dowd's comments were even more derogatory. The people in fly-over country are not stupid - they may not have the veneer of sophistication of New York or California, or be as sharply articulate, but they know when they are being insulted. It does not seem very productive to be so condescending and yet not understand why people are not agreeing with you. Instead of talking so much and isolating themselves in Blue territory, maybe they should go on a listening tour in Nebraska or West Virginia.
Howard Kurtz: Both Newsweek's Howard Fineman and CBS's John Roberts told me for today's column that the biggest journalistic failing in this campaign was failing to understand red-state America. Some other liberal writers are clearly still continuing their anti-Bush tirades, though few (outside of London's Daily Mirror) are openly accusing Bush voters of stupidity.
_______________________
New York:
What does it all mean? I agree with you that this time-honored media tradition is nonsense. As you note, if 70,000 people in Ohio change their vote, it all means something completely different!; The truth is, Rove said he would turn out 4 million new evangelicals, so the Dems turned out six million new supporters. The only problem for the Dems was Rove and the GOP ended up turning out 8 million new voters!; That's what it all means....
Howard Kurtz: Turnout was crucial in this election. But it wasn't the only factor. Bush's positioning himself as a war president, the debates, the negative ads, the conventions, the media coverage, all played a role in how the two candidates were perceived. But it's certainly true that Kerry (with 252 electoral votes) could have won, but for the Republican turnout effort trumping the Democratic effort in Ohio. Coming close doesn't count, however, at least in the eyes of journalists who write these what-it-all-means pieces.
Thanks for the chat, folks.
_______________________
