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.
________________________________________________
Fox Chapel, Pa.:
Hey, Howie, how come the White House isn't complaining about the Iraq coverage now? It was so refreshing to see the U.S. media completely set aside all objectivity on Sunday. Judy Woodruff on CNN asked Wes Clark if he stood by his criticism last week when he called Dubya "reckless."
"Judy, I stand by my words," Clark replied, clearly giving Judy an answer she was not expecting. How did she respond? By asking Clark again whether he stood by his words "even on this day." So, now we're not supposed to criticize the administration on "good" days? And how come I didn't hear a single reporter (and I admit I might have missed this) ask an administration or GOP member -- hey, wasn't this war about WMD? Please, Howie, tell me about the liberal media again!
Howard Kurtz: I'm not following your point about "objectivity." I actually thought yesterday's coverage was fairly restrained under the circumstances. There were questions about whether this would really reduce the attacks in Iraq and not much of the embarrassing cheerleading that marked the landing on the aircraft carrier, for example, or the Thanksgiving turkey event. And it's perfectly legitimate to ask Democratic candidates whether they stand by their criticism of the war in light of Saddam's capture. Every newspaper has a story today on the impact on the Dems' campaigns.
_______________________
Washington, D.C.:
What is your opinion on how the media has fixated on Saddam's capture and ignored that fact that weapons of mass destruction have yet to be found. Isn't that the "reason" why we invaded Iraq in the first place?
Howard Kurtz: I do think the WMD question doesn't simply vanish because Saddam is in U.S. custody. That is how the administration sold the war. Initial reports are that Saddam is telling his captors there were no WMDs, although that's hardly a shock.
_______________________
Arlington, Va.:
Who were those cheering the "We got him!" announcement at the begining of yesterday's press conference? Shouldn't journalists -- my assumption -- avoid cheering the news?
Howard Kurtz: They were Iraqi journalists, and while my instinct is to say that journalists shouldn't cheer at such an event, it is perhaps understandable given the three decades of brutality under Saddam, who of course didn't allow even the flicker of a free press.
_______________________
Charlottesville, Va.:
Watching the Saddam coverage yesterday (mostly on CBS, NBC and ABC), I was struck by how choreographed it seemed -- people using the same the same terms, such as "spider hole," and Sen. Biden making the rounds to all three networks. Is this just the product of everyone covering the same story, or does the Bush administration manipulating the media? As a reporter myself, I'd be a little surprised at the latter, but I've never heard the phrase "spider hole."
Howard Kurtz: Neither had I. I'm more of a rathole guy. But what happens in these breaking-news situations is that you have hordes of reporters chasing very little publicly available information. They get sketchy reports from spokesmen or military officials and basically repeat what they're told, since there's little time or ability to get more info. They're also reliant on what little video the administration releases, which made every network's reports look similar yesterday. Today at least two reporters crawled down the spider hole -- an opportunity no doubt facilitated by U.S. officials -- for reports from the now-famous spot. (I describe this in a new item on Media Notes, which will now be updated during the day for your reading pleasure.)
_______________________
Farragut Square, Washington, D.C.:
Interesting column today. Isn't it interesting that the administration has to "stage" events in order to get positive coverage?
Every negative occuracne that takes place in Bagdad is breathlessly reported, but all of the good news comes in the form of either press conferences called by someone in the administration or by staging events that are impossible to ignore.
What is one to make of the fact that left to its own devices the greatest press in the world is unable to dig up any good news on its own? Is there perhaps an agenda at work here? Hmmm...
Howard Kurtz: That's a bit unfair, because there are many brave reporters in Iraq working hard to gather both good and bad news about the situation on the ground. One of them was Time correspondent Michael Weisskopf, who was seriously injured when he threw an enemy grenade out of the Humvee in which he was traveling with a photographer and two soldiers. As for the stage-managing part, every administration does this. When they've got good news, they call news conferences, trot out the president, provide videotape, and so on. When they've got bad news, they put out terse written statements.
_______________________
Arlington, Va.:
Does anyone believe Tim Russert is a fair minded journalist? Yesterday's performance should leave no doubt about his true colors. That love fest he had with Lieberman was nauseating. Why not just endorse him and remove any veil of perceive objectivity? All of those softball questions bashing Dean were amazing. Why does he hate Dean so much? Why would any Democrat vote for Lieberman when that's practically the same as voting for Bush? Why didn't Russert ask that question?
Howard Kurtz: I haven't seen any evidence that Russert "hates" Dean. Lieberman was a strong supporter of the war; Dean was not. Of course the senator is going to be asked how his and Dean's positions look in light of Saddam's capture. In fact, I saw Lieberman asked the same questions on other networks. Apparently you see Joe Lieberman as Bush Lite, which may influence your take on his interviews.
_______________________
Arlington, Va.:
Are there really people who watched the "all Saddam, all the time" TV coverage on the major networks yesterday? I got a lot of Christmas presents wrapped while waiting for something interesting to come on. I mean, after hearing what few facts were available for the 999th time, I got a little bored. Is it just me?
Howard Kurtz: Well, it's hard to watch hours and hours of breaking-news coverage when there's little new information available (the networks were, after all, reporting on something that had happened Saturday night, so there were no unfolding developments to keep the story fresh). But the coverage isn't aimed at people (like journalists and junkies) who keep on watching. News execs assume that people come in and out and need to be updated. I'd be willing to guarantee that the cable networks, at least, tripled their usual ratings on Sunday.
_______________________
Arlington, Va.:
Much to my surprise, I really enjoy Keith Olbermann's "Countdown" on MSNBC. How does someone with that much intelligence, wit, and sense of irony survive in the cable news business? But that's not my question for you; I'd like instead to hear your opinion on how Olbermann is doing in the fickle, anxious world inside MSNBC, and whether I should let myself entertain hope for his show's long-term survival. Thanks.
Howard Kurtz: I've written favorably about his show, and he apparently gets to do things the way he wants. MSNBC wanted him so badly, in fact, that its execs were willing to overlook the harsh things Olbermann said about the network when he quit during the Monica-fest five years ago. Right now, the ratings for "Countdown" are not great, which, given MSNBC's penchant for constantly changing programming (Buchanan and Press is the latest to be canceled) makes me wonder how long they'll have patience with Keith.
_______________________
Washington, D.C.:
The biggest hyperbole I heard was "This is our VE Day." Come on.
Howard Kurtz: That's quite a bit of hyperbole. But it might be a fair description for the Iraqi people.
_______________________
Louisville, Ky.:
Appropriateness aside, isn't it still more than a little shallow to look at the political impact through the prism of one day? As a Democratic partisan, I'd want Saddam captured in 2003 rather than in 2004, and I'd want the election to swing on something other than the equally shallow "Where is Saddam?" carping that has taken up at least part of the Iraq "debate."
Howard Kurtz: Shallow though it might be, it's unavoidable 11 months before an election, especially when the leading candidate, Howard Dean, has made opposition to the war a central plank in his campaign. I don't think the capture of Saddam erases all the questions raised about the U.S. invasion and occupation, but it certainly takes some of the punch out of the Democrats' arguments on Iraq and allows Republicans to say that if Dean were president, Saddam would still be in power.
_______________________
Washington, D.C.:
Howie --
Just as a PSA to your first two chatters -- Every media outlets is today carrying stories about WMD -- I know we're all used to getting our news as rapidly as our minds turn, but seriously... chill out. Saddam Hussein was captured yesterday. Whether or not there are WMDs will come to light -- this is one of the largest accomplishments in foreign affairs in years.
Howard Kurtz: I agree that the WMD question is not going to be resolved in 24 hours. But I still believe it remains a legitimate question in light of the administration's rationale for going to war. This is a good example about how newspapers have the space and breadth to deal with a range of issues that television sometimes glosses over on a big breaking-news day.
_______________________
San Francisco, Calif.:
There seemed to be a strange agenda on some news channels, in the wake of Saddam's capture, that this event should clear the way for France, Germany, and other "non-participants" in the Iraq war to have access to Iraqi reconstruction contracts. Frankly, linking his capture to their possible participation seems a real stretch of analysis. What do you think?
Howard Kurtz: I don't know if I'd use the word "agenda." What journalists do is raise questions about the implications of a big event, and the impact on relations with France and Germany seems to me to be among those questions. It's hard for me to see a change in Bush's position on the Iraq contracts, though, since he strongly defended his stance last week despite plenty of criticism.
_______________________
La Jolla, Calif.:
Howard:
I must really be missing something because I think the capture of Saddam is just not that big of a news event that it should be interrupting all tv shows for most of yesterday. Here, in San Diego, besides not showing RELIABLE SOURCES, even MEET THE PRESS was not on. The local NBC affiliate hijacked the time slot for local news.
And today, Bush's so-called "press conference" dragged on for 45 minutes of why he should be re-elected... so he can continue to do "his job" of protecting the U.S. Bush won't need $200 million campaign war chest if the media keeps giving him all this free air time for no legitimate purpose. When is enough enough?
Howard Kurtz: You must not be a fan of the president. Every president's news conference is carried live by the cable networks, even in slow periods. They're certainly not going to dump out of it the day after Saddam's capture. These sessions are, after all, one of the few times that journalists get to try to hold a president accountable. As for the preemptions -- regrettable in my case -- local stations ultimately make those calls. Here in Washington, NBC and ABC decided to take live feeds of Meet the Press and This Week at 9 am, even though they usually air later in the morning.
_______________________
Chicago, Ill.:
Obviously the cable news networks showed footage yesterday of Iraqi civilians celebrating Hussein's capture. One piece, re-used several times, was of a bunch of happy Iraqis waving big bright red flags with the hammer and sickle on them. Huh? Do you know where these communist flags came from, and why they were being waved. I didn't catch any comments on this from the talking heads. Thanks.
Howard Kurtz: That's odd. I don't know what to make of it.
_______________________
Strasbourg, France:
After having lived most of my life overseas, interupted by several stays in the States, I have come to the conclusion that most Americans are completely void of any international knowledge. Why do the cable systems not offer such news programing like CNN International, BBC World and other English speaking news sources, whose segments last minutes not seconds, to the American people. Such an introduction would immediately give a good chunk of the viewing public an opportunity to see the world differently.
Howard Kurtz: I'll go out on a limb and say that cable execs have concluded that there aren't big ratings in international news, except when there's a war or natural disaster unfolding. Of course, there are places like BBC America, C-SPAN and Jim Lehrer's NewsHour where such news gets more of an in-depth, unhurried look. But cable news is too often chasing after the latest Kobe Bryant or Michael Jackson pseudo-development.
_______________________
Washington, D.C.:
Other than the video that was released at 7 a.m., it was a fairly uneventful day, wasn't it? Seems they could have kicked out some additional images later in the day to keep the news breaking.
Howard Kurtz: Actually, I was surprised that the administration choreographers didn't think of that, since all they put out was a few seconds and there was an insatiable appetite for such images yesterday.
_______________________
New York City, N.Y.:
Re: the Iraqi journalists who cheered the announcement. To me, that was the most telling example of how "real Iraqis" feel. We saw a LOT of pictures of jubilant Iraqis in the streets yesterday. But to see those journalists erupt in joy at seeing Saddam's haggard face on the screen really was quite amazing. Yes, yes, I know, journalists should be "objective". But I don't agree that it is just "perhaps understandable" that the Iraqis would react that way. They are human beings who've been oppressed for a long time, not robots. I'm glad that they feel they could react that way. They can go back to being "objective" tomorrow.
Howard Kurtz: No argument from me.
_______________________
Gaithersburg, Md.:
A question about the new Media Notes: is this essentially going to be similar to the many online blogs in which thoughts and links are posted basically at random throughout the day whenever something important happens? I like the idea, as it allows us to read your instant reactions and then go back later and see if your reactions change as stories develop.
However, I have to ask, are you really going to have time to maintain this? With the regular daily column, the weekly print column (plus other articles), these chats, interviews, your TV show, and it being a campaign year in which you sometimes follow candidates in action... whew! Guess you always have a laptop handy.
Howard Kurtz: Well, it's an experiment. Sometimes the morning column won't be as long, or will be posted later, and there will be fewer updates if I'm traveling or otherwise engaged. But I thought it would be fun to try. Fortunately, I'm a fast typist.
_______________________
Reston, Va.:
Hi Howard,
I think that nabbing Hussein was not good timing for the Bush re-election machine, because it happened 7 months too soon. In fact, without Saddam to focus on, it means there's no more brush for the Bushies to hide behind regarding the WMD argument as an alleged misleading reason for the war. I heard some of it yesterday already, albeit from critics.
Do you think the no WMD's found issue will become more naked, i.e., less able to be ignored as the media loses focus on the Saddam capture in the next couple months?
Howard Kurtz: I don't know. I think the overriding issue most people are interested in now is the safety of American troops. If the number of attacks subside and there's a sense that the rebuilding of Iraq is going well, many Americans will view that as a success, despite the continuing failure to find WMDs.
_______________________
Columbia, Md.:
Tom Shales in his column today mentioned the following:
"Somewhat surprisingly, Fox featured not one but two NPR reporters among its guest commentators. Fox is considered very conservative and NPR is considered very liberal. Perhaps this occasion was so momentous that even political labels and ideological fixations could be cast aside. At least for a few hours."
Doesn't Fox News consistently have panelists from NPR. It seems everyday, either Juan Williams or Mara Liasson from NPR is a guest on Brit Hume's show. These left wing columnists love to bash Fox News, but it appears they never actually watch it temselves.
washingtonpost.com: Saddam Hussein Cornered, With The Networks In Hot Pursuit (Post, Dec. 15)
Howard Kurtz: Well, you're certainly right that Mara and Juan are regular Fox contributors. And a lot of people featured on NPR, like Anne Garrels, who did great reporting from Baghdad during the war, are journalists, not opinion-mongers.
_______________________
Reston, Va.:
Why did NBC run Meet the Press early yesterday? I
was watching various stations yesterday and missed
most of MTP because I was expecting it to be on at
its regular time. I was fairly annoyed. Do you think
it was a good idea to move it up?
Howard Kurtz: I think it was understandable because everyone is scrambling at 9 am and Russert was doing the show live, as he always does at 9. In the case of This Week, ABC seemed to put a second edition on at its usual time in Washington, 11:30.
_______________________
Dem impact:
Well, I think it's a little silly to claim that this somehow impact's Dean's campaign. Those for the war were not going to vote for him anyhow.
I was against the war, but of course I was happy when Saddam was put out of power, and I think it's great he's been captured. I know my conservative friends are completely incapable of understanding how I could be against the war and yet still pleased for having Saddam out of power. I just didn't like how the politics leading up to the war played out -- notably alienating countries who we normally expect to be allies, and all the WMD claims, which have yet to borne out, of course.
It's great he's been captured, alive no less. But still doesn't justify (in my mind) the losses I believe we've suffered on the world stage. So, Dean still gets my vote.
Howard Kurtz: He'll be happy to hear that. Sometimes, I think, political analysis gets too simplistic. I suspect there are a lot of people out there who had conflicting feelings about the war, not being sure it was a good idea in the first place, not comfortable, perhaps, with Bush's go-it-alone strategy, but happy at the quick toppling of Saddam. And then, of course, unhappy with the aftermath. That's one of the reasons the polls have bounced up and down on this question. So the potential impact on the Dean campaign may turn out to be overstated.
_______________________
Howard, Miss.:
"allows Republicans to say that if Dean were president, Saddam would still be in power. "
So what? Had Saddam been left where he were, in light of the non-existence of WMD, 600 or so American GIs would not have died. $87 billion would not have to be spent but instead could be on getting children insured. Is the fall of Saddam good for Iraqis? Definitely. But is it good for America? Not necessary. Why no one has asked this question? Containment seems to have worked.
So next time when Lieberman asked Dean the Saddam question, Dean could say so what? Is not the media taking a too simplistic approach here? Am I wrong here?
Howard Kurtz: From the American point of view, the U.S. invasion involved plenty of sacrifice, in lives, hardships and dollars. From the Iraqi point of view, the removal of a brutal dictator is an unambiguously great thing. From a world diplomacy point of view, if five years from now Iraq is a flourishing pro-western democracy, many may look back on the American intervention as a success. But there's no guarantee that will happen, since the Iraqis seem to be struggling even to write a constitution.
_______________________
Kansas City, Mo.:
Being a bit late logging on this morning, I was fascinated to see the first several questions the types of questions I would have asked. Would you share your opinion as to the type of person you think draw on your Live Online format? I enjoy the format since there seems to be so few places for intelligent interaction (unfortunately).
Howard Kurtz: Hard to tell from this end. Mostly smart people with a strong interest in news coverage. And lots of people with strong opinions, just as those who call talk radio shows seem to be those with the strongest feelings about whatever is being discussed.
_______________________
Harrisburg, Pa.:
Howard, do you know how Michael Weisskopf is doing? To have the presence-of-mind (by a civilian) to toss back a live grenade (and having his hand blown off but saving the people he was riding with) is something that has not been getting a lot of press. Any additional details?
washingtonpost.com: 2 American Journalists Wounded In Baghdad (Post, Dec. 12)
Howard Kurtz: I'm afraid I don't have an update. Weisskopf is a hero, as far as I'm concerned. A very dogged reporter who didn't need to be risking attacks in Iraq at this stage of his career.
_______________________
Nederland, Colo.:
Isn't it a real scandal that ABC dropped or severely reduced their coverage of the Kucinich, Mosley Braun and Sharpton campaigns? Although behind in some sense, they are not objectively beneath every other candidate in every statistic. More importantly, their campaigns significantly broaden the debate, that was so dulled by the samenesses in 2000. Is it any less than dispicable and antidemocratic to not vigorously report these campaigns?
Howard Kurtz: No. As I mention in Media Notes today, ABC has done more coverage of those three trailing campaigns than any other news organization. But it's hugely expensive to have someone traveling with the candidates at all times. So now ABC will still be covering Sharpton, Kucinich and Braun, but not on a 24/7 basis--which is to say, the way that every other news organization covers them, and probably more than most outlets.
_______________________
Centreville, Va.:
Answers, answers, answers, Howie! Here are some...
...apparently "spider hole" comes from the Vietnam War, and refers to a place where Vietcong soldiers would wait to use as hiding holes and places from which to launch attacks. I don't know who first referred to them that way, but since so much of the coverage of this conflict is seen through the prism of Vietnam, the use of this word isn't surprising.
Biden is the ranking Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and voluble and entertaining as well. It's no shocker that those things together, plus familiarity, would make him the type of person the news anchors would turn to yesterday.
One of the nascent political movements in Iraq is the Iraqi Communist Party, which was outlawed by Hussein and operated from Kurdistan and London. Who knows if they'll try to compete in any upcoming elections, but they seem to have a better chance of doing so after yesterday.
Howard Kurtz: I knew my readers were smart. The only answer I knew is that of course Joe Biden, one of the Senate's foreign-policy experts, would make a good guest on yesterday's events.
_______________________
Gambrills, Md.:
It's too early to predict what impact Saddam's capture will have on the Democrats. I don't recall that the Democrats main complaint with Bush was that he hadn't caught Saddam. The complaints were over the justification for the war in Iraq and the miserable planning for running Iraq after we won. Also, Osama bin Laden is a much more frightening character than Saddam.
Howard Kurtz: Yes, but several of the Democrats regularly toss why-haven't-we-caught-Saddam lines into their speeches. As for the impact, OF COURSE it's too early to know, but that's what daily journalism does, offer analysis and speculation about unfolding events that sometimes turns out to be wrong. The press was convinced, for example, that Bush's landing on the "Mission Accomplished" aircraft carrier was such a triumph it would show up in the president's 2004 ads. Instead, it wound up in a John Kerry ad.
_______________________
Bowie, Md.:
I know you hate the self-selecting on line poll as unscientific and worthless, but one of the questions posed yesterday by (I think) CNN "Should Saddam have been taken alive?" went completely beyond the bounds of journalism.
Howard Kurtz: It does seem to suggest that U.S. soldiers perhaps should have just killed him, even if he was not resisting capture.
_______________________
Mt. Lebanon, Pa.:
Did any of the pundits you name-dropped into your column this morning ask themselves this question about Saddam Hussein: Does his capture advance by even one day, the Quit date for US forces in Iraq?
In spite of the hoohah it doesn't appear to me that anything has substantially has changed with his capture. It's just one more big fish to fry at a world court.
As far as the situation in Iraq goes: establishing democracy, writing a constitution, picking the "right" first Iraqi sovereign, cleaning up the place, fixing the infrastructure, turning over the keys, and getting our forces home -- it's still a quagmire until the day comes when it's not. Sorry to rain on the parade.
Thanks much. Signed, Vietnam-Era Draftee.
Howard Kurtz: Actually, there are plenty of voices, both on TV and in the papers, questioning whether this will have any impact on the attacks on U.S. forces and the transition to a democratic Iraq. A front-page story in today's Washington Post is headlined "Belief That Insurgency Will Fade May Be Misplaced." But some of the pundits I mentioned are political reporters whose job it is to analyze campaigns, not military strategy. So I don't think that should be held against them.
_______________________
Kensington, Md.:
A non-Saddam question here if I may. Thursday in the NH Democratic primary debate, Ted Koppel lobbed a rather dismissive grenade, collectively, at Dennis Kucinich, Carol Mosley-Braun and Al Sharpton, telling them they had no money, were low in the polls and asking when they were going to drop out. He even mused that their presence in the race was just for "vanity". Rep. Kucinich, characteristically, retorted with an articulate and pointed admonition of Koppel that the American people were seeing how the corporate media attempts to shape politics with its obsession with candidacy being all about money. His spot-on, impromptu critique of Koppel's ethos got the biggest applause of the night, resulting in a chagrinned-looking Koppel.
A day or so later, ABC pulled the producers they had had travelling with those 3 candidates, essentially cutting off much of their chance at getting coverage. My questions are (a) do you think this move was indeed coincidental (as they say), and if not (b) do you think ABC's punitive measures will teach non-media-sanctioned candidates to be more deferential in the future to the corporate-media figures at whose pleasure they are permitted to run?
Howard Kurtz: I reported extensively on Koppel's preparations for the debate last Tuesday (he asked that question and others like it because he was trying to spark an interesting debate, not because he's a representative of "corporate media," though it's fair to say that his performance was widely panned in Durham, N.H.). But as I noted a moment ago, ABC cutting back on travel for three lagging campaigns is not "punitive," in that they'll still be covered, and I don't believe it was related to the Koppel debate.
Thanks for the chat, folks.
_______________________
