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.
_____________
Iowa City:
It seems to me that Jon Stewart hit the nail on the head. All of the he said, she said on "news" shows like CNN's Crossfire, MSNBC's Hardball, or FoxNews' Hannidy and Colmes are not furthering the debate, or adding to the dialogue in any substantive way. Instead, they are furthering the trend sensationalism, and partisin quipary in the news business. These shows are to news as pro-wrestling is to sports. Is there any end in sight, or are the news networks devoted to continuing to appeal to the least common denomenator??
Howard Kurtz: They're devoted to achieving the highest possible ratings. Look, every single show on the cable networks isn't a Crossfire-style shout show. There is plenty of programming in which reporters and analysts offer substantive reporting on the campaign. But shows like Crossfire, Hardball and Hannity & Colmes are of a certain high-decibel volume and aimed toward viewers who like that sort of thing. Jon is right about that.
_______________________
Hartford, Conn.:
Your article about the Kerry campaign not actually buying time for some of their ads was very good, but you failed to say whether or not BC/RNC do the same thing. Also, isnt this exactly how the Swift Boat Veterans got all their publicity and eventual funding, they only originally bought about $50,000 in ads.
Howard Kurtz: Actually, the article did say that there is no evidence that the Bush-Cheney campaign puts out phantom ads, and the president's media adviser was quoted as saying they do not.
_______________________
Arlington, Va.:
So the Washington Post endorses Kerry. What a surprise! Next you'll tell us the Easter Bunny isn't real.
Why do we need this election-year ritual? Why can't the Washington Post say, "We're going to endorse the Democratic candidate" before the election even starts? What's wrong with a little honesty?
Was there any real chance that the Washington Post, the New York Times, the LA Times, CNN, NBC, CBS, ABC, and the rest of Big Media were going to endorse Bush? These are liberal media organizations -- some say they're the Media wing of the Democratic Party.
Howard Kurtz: First, you should know that The Post, to the consternation of some liberals, strongly backed Bush on the war. Yesterday's editorial certainly praised some things Bush had done and expressed some reservations about Kerry. In 1988, The Post made no endorsement rather than back Dukakis. But look, it's an opinion page and they are paid to serve up their strongest arguments.
The Chicago Tribune, by the way, has endorsed Bush.
_______________________
Wheaton, Md.:
Howard, did the president's "there won't be any casualties" comments to Pat Robertson get much play elsewhere last week? I didn't see it much beyond the Post (and CNN, where it started). It seemed to me an astonishingly "tangible" example of just how out of touch with reality this guy is. Only my "partisan" opinion, of course. I'm sure his comments could be spun as "confidence", or something, by others.
Howard Kurtz: New York Times (and I'm sure others) also did a story on it. I was surprised it wasn't more of an issue, even with the White House denials. But the press seems more interested in Mary Cheney's sexuality these days.
_______________________
Portland, Ore.:
In my state ballots have already been sent
out by mail and I've already voted.
I like the idea that all the political
advertising is officially wasted on me.
Do reporters cover "early voting" yet?
Has this changed the candidates campaign
styles at all?
Howard Kurtz: We (and others) have had many stories on early voting, along with the battles over such voting in certain states. The campaigns are well aware of this trend and probably hold back less of their heavy-hitting attacks until the final days of October as a result.
_______________________
Washington, D.C.:
Isn't Jon Stewart in danger of taking himself too seriously? What if a Leno showed up on a "real" news show and started denouncing the journalists for not being serious and substantive enough? If he's so darned convinced of this, why doesn't he quit the Comedy channel and go be a news man?
Howard Kurtz: He'd be the first to tell you he's no journalist. But Jon Stewart does a very different brand of comedy than Leno and Letterman -- he ridiculed the political system (and the media) as opposed to just poking fun at the candidates. He's a guy with very strong opinions about all this, and that is part of what fuels his comedy. As for whether he now takes himself too seriously, that's up to his fans to decide, but one rant on Crossfire is obviously different from the comedic format of the Daily Show, which hasn't changed.
_______________________
Washington, D.C.:
Brian Williams has done a promo in Washington as well, with the local anchors on channel 4.
Howard Kurtz: I wish I had seen that. But hardly a surprise, since this is a key market for the incoming NBC anchor.
_______________________
Raleigh, N.C.:
Howard:
Enjoy your columns and this backtalk session immensely. Thanks for them.
You comment that the left side of the media are worried about another four years of Bush. You have also said that the press accounts for perhaps as much as 15 % boost to Kerry based on how they choose to cover the news. One key which I follow to see how the insiders view the situation is a web site for Editor & Publisher. If one goes to that site regularly, one see an incredible amount of favoritism toward Kerry. Yet there is no mention of issues of voter turnout/fraud.
My question: Do you feel that the issue of voter registration/fraud/legal disputes is being underreported by the media at the present time, and is this more of the kind of slant noted above? Why or why not?
Howard Kurtz: First, I didn't say the press gives Kerry a 15 percent boost, Newsweek's Evan Thomas did. (He downgraded this to 5 percent last week on my show.)
I don't think the voter registration/fraud disputes are being undercovered at all. They've been on the front page of The Post and other big papers day after day, Time did a cover story, etc. If anything I wonder whether we're overcompensating for what happened in 2000 and don't want anyone to say we blew it this time.
_______________________
Boring, Md.:
Re: the Sinclair Broadcast Group and their decision to run a program on their affiliate stations which was based on an anti-Kerry documentary... from what I can tell they own 62 uhf stations and this was the first time they tried to show something on ALL their different stations all at once, are there other broadcast groups like this, or is this one unique in some way? And do you think they are likely to do something like this again or, because it met such a public outcry, that they won't be dallying in controversy anymore? I wonder why they tried so hard to get such bad publicity.
Howard Kurtz: I think they will do it whenever they feel like it. It's their toy store, after all. Sinclair hasn't done a comparable special this year, but I'm not sure about the past.
_______________________
Allentown, Pa.:
Howie, I know Kerry has called upon lots of celebrities to help him with his final push towards November 2nd. Do you think this is really helpful? We all like seeing stars, but who's going to take their political advice? They aren't really known as serious, sober-minded people, right?
Isn't one Bill Clinton worth about 30 of these Hollywood twits?
Howard Kurtz: Maybe. But the Bruce Springsteen et al. rock tour is certainly raising millions of dollars for the pro-Kerry side.
_______________________
Washington, D.C.:
Look, Foxnews, CNN and MSNBC are news shows and they are concerned about what people like?!; That's for comedy shows.
Look, are the "right-wing, conservative media outlets" going to talk about the 350 Tons of Weapons materials missing from Iraq since the invasion? Or is that just too much hard work?
Howard Kurtz: I'm told that story, broken by the New York Times this morning, is getting some discussion on Fox.
If you're shocked to hear that even news shows worry about ratings, I'm sorry. But that is the reality. The days when the big networks were happy to have their news divisions lose money because of the prestige they provided are long gone.
_______________________
Clarendon, Alexandria, Va.:
I think one problem with the conventional broadcast media (including cable) is that they all cover the SAME story. Whether it is an abduction, a political gaffe or a shark attack, there always seems to be the same one or two news stories on everywhere. CSPAN is an exception and has some excellent current events programming but it takes up quite a bit of time to absorb it unfiltered. The Internet allows one to target a specific special interest, point of view, or media outlet that you want to intake -- on demand -- because it is all out there. The conventional broadcast media had better decide what it wants to be or else it will become irrelevant.
Howard Kurtz: I think cable is more guilty of this--not just at campaign time, but when they flit from Kobe to Scott Peterson to Martha Stewart to Michael Jackson and so on. Broadcast network news, whether it's the evening news or the morning shows or the magazine shows, almost by definition offer a summary of the day's news, although they often trumpet the flap du jour as well.
_______________________
Houston, Tex.:
In 2000, there was very little exit polling data available due to technical problems at Voter News Service. What process have the major news outlets put in place this year to handle exit polling?
Howard Kurtz: Actually, that was 2002. As I wrote a couple of weeks back, the networks have dumped Voter News Service and hired two new companies, Edison Research and Mitofsky International, to handle the exit polling next week. They are all very confident that they have a better handle on things than in 2000, having done many computer simulations. But network execs also say they will be more cautious about using the data to make projections, having embarrassed themselves so thoroughly in the Gore-Bush race.
_______________________
Baltimore, Md.:
Howard - Good column today on the worries of the self-defined left wing print media outlets. My question: Fox is consistently hammered for being a right wing mouthpiece. Yet MSNBC, which identifies dedicated Bush haters like Ron Reagan, Joe Trippi and Lawrence O'Donnell as "Senior Analyst," as though they might be depended on for an impartial analysis, is never ridiculed as a left wing organ. How come?
Howard Kurtz: Probably because MSNBC also features such people as Joe Scarborough, a former Republican congressman, and Frank Luntz, a pollster who's worked for many Republicans. Peggy Noonan was a regular Hardball guest before taking a leave to join the GOP. I don't know that Keith Olbermann or Lester Holt have any ideology that they share with voters.
_______________________
Fairfax, Va.:
Is it possible that it's just a lot of hyperbole when everyone says that this is the most important election of our lifetimes? Could it be that we can only gauge the importance of a single election with the benefit of hindsight? I don't remember people saying four years ago that that presidential election would be as pivotal as it turned out to be. With the exception of the Supreme Court (a very important issue), I don't see that the person who will occupy the White House for the next four years will have much room to maneuver for significant accomplishments.
Thanks
Howard Kurtz: Every election of my lifetime has been described as the most important election of my lifetime. But in the wake of 9/11 and Iraq, and given the very sharp contrasts between these two presidential candidates, it seems a little less like hype than in some past elections.
_______________________
Vienna, Va.:
Howard,
Do you see much value in debates such as those yesterday on Meet The Press, which featured Ed Gillespie and Terry McAuliffe? As a political junkie, it's hard to imagine a less interesting panel! Why have party heads trade talking points? What is to be learned from this?
Lots of journalists are doing excellent work on the ground covering the election, and could provide interesting alalysis. There are plenty of hotly contested House races that would make for interesting debates (I realize Bunning refused to debate Mongiardo). I feel like Russert is not making an effort to have an interesting show.
Howard Kurtz: Look, a debate between party chairmen is what it is. You know you're getting the talking points, but you're also getting some insight (however limited) into what themes each side is trying to use against the other. As for Russert, I give him credit to devoting substantial airtime to a series of debates between Senate contenders. No other national show has done that. Obviously there would be less national interest in a particular House race than in statewide contests.
_______________________
McLean, Va.:
Howard, do you watch the McLaughlin Group at all, as part of your survey of the media? My husband and I have been watching the McLaughlin Group for several years and have been struck lately by the anger toward Bush and the lack of time alotted to the Republican side of the panel. Do you think this show might be drowning in its own vitriol?
Howard Kurtz: I've never noticed the conservative side being underrepresented when I watch McLaughlin (I once devoted a chapter to the program in my book Hot Air). McLaughlin, after all, is a former Nixon White House staffer and no one's idea of a bleeding-heart liberal.
_______________________
Baltimore, Md.:
Mr. Kurtz,
Great pieces focusing on election coverage. But your gut feeling... election swinging towards Bush or swinging towards Kerry?
And also, gut feeling over/under on the number of weeks after Nov. 2 until we know who actually won the election.
Howard Kurtz: I've learned over the course of my career that gut feelings aren't worth much. Especially in such a tight election. And I have no idea whether we'll know who won on Nov. 3 or be battling it out for weeks. It does seem the odds are against two disputed photo finishes in a row, but then the odds were against the Red Sox coming back from a 3-0 deficit.
_______________________
Washington, D.C.:
Hi Howard--
One thing that I haven't seen picked up by the media yet is the large number of newspapers that are endorsing Kerry. According to Editor & Publisher magazine, 125 newspapers have endorsed Kerry, with only 96 endorsing Bush. That alone may not mean much, except that 35 of the newspapers endorsing Kerry had endorsed Bush in 2000! (Only two newspapers that endorsed Gore in 2000 are endorsing Bush in 2004 and several more newspapers that endorsed Bush in 2000 are declining to endorse anybody in 2004).
This seems like very big news!
washingtonpost.com: Daily Endorsement Tally: On 'Super Sunday,' Kerry Makes Huge Gains (Editor & Publisher, Oct. 23)
Howard Kurtz: Well, yes and no. The papers that switched are an interesting sign. But even editorial page editors will tell you that they don't believe their endorsements move many votes. And it's hardly a shock that the NYT, WP, Boston Globe and Philly Inquirer have endorsed Kerry. What probably matters more is what the Columbus Dispatch and Tampa Tribune and other swing-state papers do.
_______________________
Steubenville, Ohio:
How accurate are election polls -- the staple of many journalists' existence -- given that they do not reach cell phone owners (probably many of whoma are younger and more affluent) and people who have home answering machine? Will you do a post-election review of the polls vs. the results?
Howard Kurtz: I may or may not personally do it, but there will be plenty of that. Especially with the surveys all over the map in recent weeks. Even worse than the cell-phone problem is the practice of "weighting," in which pollsters adjust their samples to try to match the political makeup of the country. It's often more art than science.
_______________________
McLean, Va.:
Howard -- are there rules regarding how the media reports polls that are within the margin of error? I noted that last week, an AP poll that had Kerry up by 3 was reported as a "dead heat" but a Reuters poll that had Bush up by 1 was reported as a "lead" (in spite of the fact that both polls had similar margins of error). What gives?
Howard Kurtz: There are no official "rules" but any news organization that trumpets a margin-of-error poll as being a significant "lead" for one candidate or the other is engaging in unfortunate hype. Yes, Bush might have a 2-point lead over Kerry in some poll, but that means it is just as likely, given the margin of error, that Kerry is slightly ahead of Bush.
_______________________
Farmington Hills, Mich.:
My husband and I are huge Jon Stewart fans. When I heard he was going to be on 60 Minutes we sat down to watch. I was kind of shocked when it was mentioned that the same company that owns CBS owns Comedy Central-I then told my husband that I think we just watched a 15 minute commercial. Am I wrong in thinking this is a little fishy?
As a side note the Emmet Till story on 60 Minutes was moving and made me wish some Republicans would remember what once passed for "conservative" values and how dangerous they could be today.
Howard Kurtz: 60 Minutes has been accused before of promoting authors of books published by another unit of Viacom, but I don't think that's the case here (though CBS was smart to not only disclose the corporate tie but include a Stewart joke about Dan Rather's National Guard story). The Emmy-winning Stewart is white hot right now, on the cover of both Rolling Stone and The Washington Post. What newsmagazine show wouldn't want to have him on?
_______________________
Endorsements:
I think you're right about newspaper endorsements not moving a lot of votes--but they have an impact on readership. I'm okay with the Post's endorsement of Kerry (shocker, but at least it was well-written), but I and a lot of fellow Missourians canceled our St. Louis Post-Dispatch subscriptions and advertising when that paper endorsed a dead Mel Carnahan for Senate.
Howard Kurtz: Well, it's the right of any reader to cancel a subscription because of a disagreement with the editorial page (though I thought a vote for Carnahan was widely viewed as a vote for his wife, who in fact won the seat). But I'd argue there's a lot more value in a typical newspaper even if you think the editorial writers are dead wrong 99.99 percent of the time.
_______________________
Boston MA:
Do you think the New York Times, Washington Post or even the tradition breaking New Yorker endorsements will translate to any extra Kerry votes?
Howard Kurtz: Maybe three or four.
_______________________
Annandale, Va.:
Given the ages of most of the Supreme Court justices, and today's news about Justice Rehnquist, do you think there will be more discussion about the Court as an issue? To me, this by itself is enough to make this the most important election of my lifetime.
Howard Kurtz: The news that Rehnquist has been hospitalized for thyroid cancer virtually guarantees several days of very heavy coverage of the impact of next Tuesday's election on the high court. Everyone knew there are several justices of advanced age who are likely to retire over the next four years, but this sort of dramatic development involving the chief justice puts all that front and center in the race.
_______________________
New York:
Howard -- you said a few days back, that maybe it was more important to focus on say, Iraq, then Teresa Kerry's statement about Mrs Bush (which indcidentaly, I did not think was insulting, although it was wrong and Mrs. kerry corrected it). ANd then you went on to write about papers or blogs that covered Mrs Kerry's comments. Surely, if you think the Iraq war is more important than that comment, then you should cover it more yourself ?
Howard Kurtz: What some people don't understand about particularly my online column is that I try to reflect what it's in the press, on TV and in the blogs. And if they are all glomming onto something that I think may be minor or even pointless, I will cover it anyway to give readers a sense of what's out there. I will give you my analysis, but I'm trying to vacuum up the best and most provocative examples of what the media are doing.
_______________________
Washington, D.C.:
For what it is worth, Columbus endorsed Bush.
The headline (online) for Tampa is:
"Why We Cannot Endorse President Bush For Re-Election"
Though they didn't endorse Kerry either.
Howard Kurtz: Right. The Tampa Trib took the easy way out. My feeling is that if editorial writers tell you what to think about the issues 365 days a year, they ought to be able to grapple with the same choice that Americans must make every four years, even if they're not wild about either candidate.
_______________________
Alexandria, Va.:
I thought it was the liberal media that was so hot to get to the bottom of the Robert Novak-Plame mess. They demanded a special prosecutor. Now you're telling us this morning that this now counts as a sign of Bush's anti-press animus? If liberal reporters didn't want this leak probe, then why did they push so hard for it?
Howard Kurtz: First, "liberal" reporters don't push for anything, although liberal columnists and editorial writers do. Second, the people who leaked Plame's name were quite possibly violating the law, so there is a national interest in finding out who did it. But how does it serve that cause if Judith Miller of the New York Times -- who had such a conversation with some official(s) but DIDN'T WRITE A WORD ABOUT IT and thus was not part of the outing -- goes to jail because she won't reveal her confidential sources?
_______________________
Arlington, Va.:
Howard, you mention that the president hasn't done very many major interviews. But you didn't mention that Kerry has largely contained himself to Jon Stewart (liberal), BET (liberal), or Regis and Letterman... before today. As the righties hit him with Swift Boat vets and Stolen Honor, he hasn't talked anywhere about his Vietnam years, has he?
Howard Kurtz: I've mentioned Kerry limiting his media diet to the likes of Stewart and Dr. Phil many times. He seems to be coming out of this self-imposed cocoon--he did an interview with Katie Couric that aired this morning, and one with CNN's Candy Crowley the other day. Bush was on with Charlie Gibson this morning after doing Sean Hannity. But both candidates have steered away from hard-news interviewers for much of the last two months.
Thanks for the chat, folks.
_______________________
