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)
|
|
Submit your questions and comments before or during the discussion.
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.
________________________________________________
Boston, Mass.:
Mr. Kurtz,
Your thoughts on Kerry's debate challenge? Didn't he know that Bush would say no? Does that mean that we have this ad campaign over the next 8 months?
Howard Kurtz: It was a gambit. Kerry and his people knew there was no way an incumbent president is going to agree to monthly debates eight months before Election Day. That would have elevated Kerry's stature almost no matter how the debates came out. But it gives them a good talking point: We challenged the president to a mano a mano showdown and he refused the offer.
_______________________
Clementi, Singapore:
Howard
I've been a big fan of your writing since reading ''Spin Cycle'' a few years back.
Howard Dean on ''Meet the Press'' said that jobs was the number one issue in the election. This suggested that he was batting for the same team as John Kerry.
But then he defended his widely criticised statement from last year that the US was no safer with Saddam captured.
In a situation like that, was he on the program as his own man, since he led the charge criticising the war, or was he there at the behest of the Kerry campaign?
Howard Kurtz: I don't know how Dean got booked, but he was clearly determined to talk up Kerry's candidacy. At the same time, Dean wasn't going to back off his own criticism of just a few short weeks ago. Dean had a difficult balancing act and pulled it off fairly well. He downplayed his earlier criticism by saying that campaigns are tough, they exaggerate differences and the voters have spoken, which put him in position to defend Kerry now on such issues as Iraq.
_______________________
Washington, D.C.:
Howard, I read with interest your Media Notes column today and got to thinking about the recent spate of plagerism in journalism. Is there any sort of "Journalist's Code" to which reporters abide (like oaths taken by doctors and lawyers)? Is there any accredidation process for journalists? Do you think that there is room for this or that this would benefit the fourth estate?
Howard Kurtz: There's no licensing, no accreditation process. Anyone can declare himself or herself a journalist. I don't have any quarrel with that; we don't want some professional board deciding who can and cannot be admitted to the priesthood. If you work for a news organization, however, you're expected to abide by rules against plagiarism and other journalistic sins. There are supposed to be some checks and balances in the form of editors reviewing your work. I continue to be amazed by how many otherwise competent journalists engage in deception or rip off other people's work, in part because these days it's so easy to get caught.
_______________________
Dunkirk, Md.:
Mr. Kurtz:
You listed several instances in which journalists fabricated information as a contributing factor in the public's decline of trust in the media. Although true, there is another, perhaps stronger, way in which such actions have weakened trust.. A recurrent pattern has been that the media catch one of their own making up stories or data, a public lamenting occurs, then the guilty parties write books and/or articles, appear on talk shows and, in general, develop a reasonably lucrative career, one that, in terms of hours worked, compensation received and public visibility, many with ordinary jobs would envy. This is AFTER they have been found guilty of violating the trust of their readers and their employers. Most readers accept the fact that there are bad apples among the media as in other professions. What is harder to accept is the way in which the media helps them avoid the consequences of their actions. An excellent example is your recent, very lengthy article regarding Jayson Blair's book. I understand that, as the journalist who broke the story, you have a stronger than usual interest in it. However, if you truly Blair's book truly represented news, a paragraph could easily have summarized your lengthy article. The lengthy article only served as free advertising for Mr. Blair. Although your article was hardly a flattering review, many studies have shown that in the "celebrity world" any coverage can be helpful.
I do not suggest that journalists are alone in protecting their own. A similar decline in trust has been shown for ceos, politicians, doctors, lawyers, clergy, et al. In most cases, if an ordinary employee makes a serious mistake or engages in illegal or unethical behavior, he/she is fired. However, once a certain, level is reached in any of those professions, any punishment is generally minimal or non-existent. Golden parachutes, private counseling, etc. are the more likely outcomes. The recent parade of Enron executives, Martha Stewart, etc. are the exceptions that prove the rule.
Sorry this is so long; but it is a point that the media should more seriously consider.
Howard Kurtz: Believe me, I thought about it. But while you can argue that the media have bestowed a brief moment of celebrity on Jayson Blair, the coverage he's gotten has been relentlessly negative, particularly in book reviews. It may not help him sell many books, if Amazon's figures are any indication, and in all probability is helping to hold accountable a man who had refused to discuss his journalistic crimes until now. I don't think anyone can suggest that my piece was soft on Blair, and the same goes for my CNN interview with him, which is now scheduled to air next Sunday morning.
_______________________
New York:
Howard,
It appears Jayson Blair's book is flopping. I haven't seen it ranked above about 200 on Amazon and when I went into my neighborhood Barnes & Noble this weekend it appeared no more than a couple copies of the book had moved.
Why do you think the publisher thought it would be profitable?
Thanks for the great work.
Howard Kurtz: Because Blair became famous, or infamous, as the man behind one of the biggest journalism scandals of the last quarter-century; because it involves the New York Times; because his tale involves sex, drugs and race. But that doesn't mean people will rush to buy his book, particularly when it's getting trashed by reviewers.
_______________________
Washington, D.C.:
Thanks for printing the Tucker Carlson item this morning. It gave me a good chuckle.
I also think he reached the correct conclusion in the end about both the questions and his answers.
Howard Kurtz: And I only pubished the more tasteful replies!
_______________________
Louisville, Ky.:
Howard, your Stern item reminds me of the 1976 veep debate in which candidate Dole said of Jimmy Carter's "lust in my heart" interview, "We'll concede him the bunny vote." The margin of victory was pretty close to Playboy's circulation at the time.
Howard Kurtz: Well, it remains to be seen whether Stern's listeners vote in large numbers, or if they do whether they follow his advice. But to have a radio host with an audience of millions, who's been sympathetic to Republicans in the past, bashing Bush day after day has got to have some kind of effect.
_______________________
Arlington, Va.:
John Dean said over the weekend on CSPAN that to have a scandal, there must a reaction in the media and a negative one. Is that true?
Howard Kurtz: Probably, but that reaction can easily be caused by political opponents jumping up and down and expressing outrage. By the same token, if the media keep pounding on a potential scandal and the politicians remain quiet and there isn't much public reaction, that story is going to fade rather quickly whether the press likes it or not.
_______________________
Los Angeles, Calif.:
Howard,
In light of the primary polls about Howard Dean being so way off, I thought the media might do fewer polls. But not so. I, for one, now question their accuracy, not to mention their validity, more than ever. How do we know they are right, even within the so-called margin of error (and, obviously, the margin of error on the Dean polls was way off, too)?
You would think the media would learn the error of their ways (no pun intended) -- about polls, anonymous sources, fact-checking of reporters, etc. But that doesn't seem to have happened. Why not?
Howard Kurtz: Fewer polls? No way. The media have a lot invested in these polls -- not just financially, but metaphysically. They create instant news "stories" that are then quoted by other news organization ("A USA Today/Gallup poll found...") They give the appearance of movement in a race, even though it may be a statistically insignificant blip. My complaint about polls is not that they're inaccurate -- several, for example, caught part of the late surge toward Kerry and Edwards in Iowa -- but that journalists take early polls and frame the race around them long before most voters have tuned in. That's what happened with Dean, and that's why Bush's campaign is now being portrayed as being in some trouble.
_______________________
Summerfield, N.C.:
Mr. Kurtz,
How accurate can polling be these days with caller-id, do-not-call-lists, etc.? I note in today's column that you mention that 54 percent of people did not feel comfortable with some of the 9/11 imagery in President Bush's recent ads. However, no margin of error was mentioned -- how can I rely on these figures as accurate?
Howard Kurtz: That poll was a pretty large one -- more than 1,000 people interviewed -- and even if the margin of error was, say, 4 points, it's giving us a good snapshot on the issue. In general, polls are good at providing rough snapshots. What they're less good at it predicting the outcome of a tight race where it's not clear who's going to turn out, and where news-starved journalists inflate their significance.
_______________________
Charlottesville, Va.:
The tone and substance of newspaper headlines recently has made me wonder whether every major newspaper has made Maureen Dowd its executive editor. We all know that the media creates the tide of momentum that determines the course of presidential elections. Why won't anyone acknowledge in their print that this is typically the low point for incumbent presidential approval in any election cycle, and that at this point in 1984 and 1996 respectively, the eventual losers had sizeable leads over the incumbent president?
Howard Kurtz: I've seen the latter point mentioned several times. Not to mention that Dukakis had a 17-point lead over the first President Bush in June of 1988. Any reporter who reads too much into these early surveys, given that Kerry's had a good ride in the Democratic primaries and Bush's campaign is just getting started, is guilty of journalistic malpractice.
_______________________
Jacksonville, Fla.:
The current Jason Blaire Amazon.com Sales Rank: 7,215
There is some justice in the world
Howard Kurtz: I haven't checked myself, but that's an amazing number, if true, given that he's been on Today, Dateline, Larry King, O'Reilly and Hardball.
_______________________
Harrisburg, Ill.:
After all the coverage of the two or three 9/11 widows who criticized President Bush's ads which referred to 9/11, why has there been so little coverage of the recent revelation that all were members of the same anti-war group which was funded in part by a foundation controlled by John Kerry's wife?
Similar question: in all the stories which cited the firefighters' union's criticism of the ads, why was there almost no mention of the fact that the firefighters' union endorsed John Kerry several months ago and has been one of his staunchest supporters?
It seems that the news media has fallen asleep on the job in the sense that they are not reporting very relevant political biases of the people making these claims.
Howard Kurtz: On the first point, I think some journalists were slow to grasp that some of the 9/11 families -- certainly not all -- are part of a coalition with an antiwar agenda. But virtually every story I read about the firefighters union mentioned the Kerry endorsement. In fact, Kerry was on the tube today at the firefighters convention, calling for more firefighters, better training and equipment, etc.
_______________________
Follow-up question on polls from los angeles:
You said polls "create instant news 'stories' " -- why is the media creating news and not just reporting it? Doesn't that create some of the anger toward reporters these days, that they overstep their bounds?
Howard Kurtz: There are lots of reasons for the anger. Would you rather read a poll story or 16 more stories about Janet Jackson's breast? I think it's perfectly okay for a news organization to hire a reputable firm to do a poll and publicize the findings, which can be particularly useful in analysis pieces. I just think there are too many of them and that every news outlet overplays its own polls and underplays everyone else's.
_______________________
Greenbelt, Md.:
Do the election results from Spain throw any cold water on the Bush campaign's use of 9-11 for political gain? It seems the lesson is that when folks get scared enough by terrorism, they want new leaders to address the issue. Do you suppose we will now have fewer increases in the terror alert system, for example?
Howard Kurtz: I'm not accepting the premise of your question, that Bush is using 9/11 for political gain. How could a president not talk about the biggest single event of his term and the issue on which he's expended the most political energy? The election results raise serious questions for Spain - a prime minister who appeared headed for reelection is defeated because of terrorist attacks for which he somehow bears the blame? And obviously, having been closely associated with Bush's war on terror is not necessarily an asset for leaders of countries that were highly skeptical about the Iraq invasion. But I'm not sure you'll see the Democrats making hay about the Spanish returns.
_______________________
Evanston, Ill.:
As someone who chooses to not watch televsion, excuse my ignorance, but why is Howard Stern bashing Bush? (There are so many possibilities, but am just wondering what issues he's focusing on.)
Howard Kurtz: It's all about the FCC crackdown on so-called indecent programming, which Stern (who appears on radio, not TV) is blaming on the Bush administration.
_______________________
McLean, Va.:
Howard,
I liked your article this morning regarding the decline of traditional media. I think trust is the most important issue but I don't think the recent rash of bad reporters is the major issue. I feel like it's the the fact that ratings drive the news. It seems like news organizations are primarily concerned with putting the stories out that will sell papers/get ratings instead of putting the stories out that are truly important.
And on a lesser note: Howard Stern will only have an effect on the presidential election if his audience stays tuned-in during his rants -- not likely. I've been listening to him for a long time and lately I've been turning the dial regularly.
washingtonpost.com: In a Deluge of Scandal, An Erosion of Trust (Post, March 15)
Howard Kurtz: I don't think the individual scandals are the major reason for the erosion of trust either (though they certainly don't help). It's all the things that people have come to resent about Big Media -- sensationalism, arrogance, triviality, mistakes and what many folks on both sides of the spectrum view as political bias. Combine that with cutbacks in newsgathering, greater corporate concentration and younger people who are bored by such traditional outlets as newspapers and you've got a disheartening situation.
_______________________
Louisville, Ky.:
Re Jayson Blair celebrity. Do you know Jim Lehrer's novel -- Crown Oklahoma? Among other things, it is about a network reporter who fabricates a story using anonymous sources with the intent of being caught and using the notoriety from that to sell his memoirs. It came out, I think, in 1989.
Howard Kurtz: Maybe Blair read it.
_______________________
New Orleans, La.:
Why isn't the Kerry "foreign leaders" statement not getting bigger play? Isn't foreign government trying to influence the internal U.S. politics a big story? Or is it that they're just supporting the media's candiate so just move along folks, nothing to see here?
washingtonpost.com: Kerry Challenged on Claim of Foreign Support (Post, March 15)
Howard Kurtz: It's getting more play today because Colin Powell slapped Kerry about it on "Fox News Sunday" (and a heckler raised it on the campaign trail). In general, it's something that journalists can't prove one way or the other -- How many "foreign leaders" did Kerry talk to? Who are they? Are they really rooting for Bush's defeat or just making nice with the man who may be his successor? It's not like a charge about the budget or health care, which reporters can then research and analyze. But when a statement like that draws opposition fire, it becomes easier to turn into a news story.
_______________________
Potomac, Md.:
Why do journalists quote what Howard Stern is saying about the current indecency issues on the air? He's doing a radio show. He never claimed that his show is "non-fiction" so he's free to say whatever he wants -- no matter how ridiculous.
It seems obvious he's being melodramatic to the extreme just to get people to listen (nothing wrong with that). These journalists kinda seem like his pawns.
Howard Kurtz: First of all, Stern's show is non-fiction in that he interviews real people (including Arnold when he was running for governor of California). Second, when a guy who's syndicated throughout the country, has millions of listeners and has made a fortune for his company starts blasting Bush, that strikes me as news. Why would we quote some backbencher member of Congress and not a radio host with a big following who's threatening to quit? The only reason the Stern story isn't getting more attention is that he's turned down all television interviews.
_______________________
Chicago, Ill.:
I'm one of the people you cite as turning away from mainstream media, and I agree with your characterization. It's mainly the corporate domination and concentration that bothers me. Big media is nothing more than a bulletin board of the elites. Do you disagree?
Howard Kurtz: That strikes me as too harsh. For example, General Electric may own NBC, but that doesn't mean that the producers and correspondents of NBC, MSNBC, CNBC and the local affiliates see themselves as doing GE's bidding or limit their reporting to elites. Big news organizations get too wrapped up with quoting and reporting on insiders, but there's been more of an effort in recent years to find out what people on the street are saying as well -- one of the justifications for the endless polls.
_______________________
Baltimore, Md.:
In Kerry's original quote he said he had "MET" with foriegn leaders. He backtracked from that yesterday. I think he changed it to "spoken to" and also changed his definition of a leader.
Howard Kurtz: Sounds like he was a little too loose with his words, then.
_______________________
East Lansing, Mich.:
What is your reaction to today's New York Times story about the White House using phony journalists and experts in news broadcasts to advocate their cause?
Howard Kurtz: Pretty disturbing. It's become common practice for companies and trade associations to put out these video news releases, which sometimes are not identified as such when they're used by local stations. But for the government to get into the same business is troubling. And the use of paid actors as journalists shows a kind of contempt for the news business. I'm sure the Bush administration would prefer that all questions came from such faux journalists and not the authentic variety.
_______________________
Texas:
Jayson Blair was awfully young when he was writing for the Times. Is it typical for a paper like the Times (or the Post) to have many reporters that age doing front-page stories on major national issues? I would have thought the average Times journalist would have spent several years writing about school board meetings in Topeka before reaching that level.
I know age is no guarantee, and much less an excuse. Nor am I suggesting a minimum age be established. But don't you think a reporter who has finished growing up and who has perhaps made some of his/her errors in a less high-stakes environment would be less likely to spin out of control and create this kind of disaster?
Howard Kurtz: The guy is 27 -- hardly a high school student -- but I take your point. One of the lingering questions about the Blair mess is why a reporter with all his personal problems and erratic work behavior was assigned to a sensitive story like the Washington sniper case, and whether his minority status had much to do with his hiring and promotion. (Blair himself says that race both helped and hurt him.) Stephen Glass was 25 when he was exposed as a serial fabricator, and perhaps there are more than a few younger writers out there determined to make it to the big leagues without doing the basic grunt work of reporting. Janet Cooke was young as well. But I've written about plenty of older, even grizzled veterans who have committed journalistic sins.
_______________________
New York, N.Y.:
Howie -- I couldn't believe your response to "Chicago!" You think NBC will be able to report on GE's pollution, labor practices, etc., when it is owned by GE? I can't tell if you were trying to be funny, but if not that, I think you are naive. I think Chicago nailed it dead-on: mainstream media is a bulletin board for the elites.
Howard Kurtz: First of all, there are instances of NBC reporting on negative information about General Electric, and of ABC reporting negatively on Disney, just as I occasionally report critically on The Post or on Newsweek, which is owned by The Post Co. But that wasn't my point. My point is that the working stiffs in any large media corporations don't see themselves as spear-carriers for their elite bosses.
_______________________
Washington, D.C.:
What are your thoughts about the "feud" between "The Daily Show" and "Hardball" surrounding the appearance of Bishop Desmond Tutu? The back and forth between Stewart and Matthews has been very entertaining.
Howard Kurtz: Funny and hard to take all that seriously.
_______________________
Washington, D.C.
It's interesting to see that the study showed the increasing coverage of entertainment stories in the "news" media.
Is this because Americans want more entertainment pieces rather than news pieces, major or the fact that news produces believe that their sagging or stagnet ratings and circulation is due to the fact that there is too much of a focus on news.
Howard Kurtz: Well, the audience does bear some responsibility here. One reason that much of the media have moved in a softer, sometimes junkier direction, why there's so much on Laci and Kobe and Michael Jackson and his sister's wardrobe malfunction, is that news executives are convinced this is what brings in viewers and readers. To some extent consumers vote with their quarters and their remote controls, and therefore bear some responsibility for what the media are dishing out.
Thanks for the chat, folks.
_______________________
