Critiquing the Press

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."

Illiterate at 12, CBS Success at 46 (Post, May 7)

The transcript follows.

Media Backtalk transcripts archive

____________________

Tolland, Conn.: Howard, last week a number of news outlets (including The Post I think) had stories the day after the President's veto of the war funding bill, saying some variation of "the president won the first round, but..." I guess in my view who "won" is a really loaded question in this case, and certainly not so clear-cut. Doesn't it color the debate for news outlets to make statements like this in the first paragraph of a story?

Howard Kurtz: It would help our discussions if you folks can be specific. Here is the top of the news story that The Washington Post ran the day after the veto. There was a sidebar that quoted the positions of the Democrats' '08 candidates. I wonder if you're thinking of what columnists had to say:

President Bush vetoed a $124 billion measure yesterday that would have funded overseas military operations but required him to begin withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq as early as July, escalating the most serious confrontation between the White House and Congress over war policy in a generation.

Bush carried through on his veto threat just after the legislation arrived at the White House, calling the timetable a "prescription for chaos and confusion" that would undercut generals. "Setting a deadline for withdrawal would demoralize the Iraqi people, would encourage killers across the broader Middle East and send a signal that America will not keep its commitments," he said last night. "Setting a deadline for withdrawal is setting a date for failure."

Democratic congressional leaders cast the veto as willful defiance of the American people. "The president wants a blank check," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) said just minutes after Bush's statement. "The Congress is not going to give it to him." Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (Nev.) said that "if the president thinks that by vetoing this bill he will stop us from trying to change the direction of this war, he is mistaken."

_______________________

Harrisburg, Pa.: I felt the Post really let itself slip by printing Robert Novak's column last week regarding Mitt Romney. I'll sheepishly admit looking at it because of the incendiary headline -- something about a 19th-century 9/11 -- but boy, did it come across as a hatchet job. Do you think this sort of column will become de rigueur throughout the campaigns?

washingtonpost.com: A 19th-Century 9/11 (Post, May 3)

Howard Kurtz: I find it a little odd that Novak is chiding Romney for not offering an opinion on a movie that involves Mormonism and an 1857 massacre -- I'm pretty sure Mitt wasn't there -- but Novak writes an opinion column. It runs on the op-ed page. You can agree or disagree, but nobody's passing this off as news.

_______________________

Culpeper, Va.: When I look at the presidential campaign recently conducted in France, I can't help but compare it to our own such campaigns. Not that I followed it word-for-word, I don't recall hearing a single story on whether or not Segolene Royal uses Botox on her wrinkle-free forehead, as I'm sure would have been the case with an American election. That's the kind of trivialization of democracy to which the American news media has reduced our elections. Any comment?

Howard Kurtz: I don't know about the appearance issues -- didn't some French magazine run a photo of Sego in a bikini? -- but the French must be doing something right. Yesterday's turnout was reported to be 84 percent, while the U.S. has trouble cracking 50. Maybe it's because the French election hasn't been going on for two years, as ours will be by the time November of '08 rolls around.

_______________________

La Quinta, Calif.: Could you please explain why The Washington Post falsely claimed, on its front page, that the Democrats had conceded the timeline issue in Iraq occupation funding, then buried the correction in an appendage to its archived article? I used to expect better of The Post, but it's more like the Washington Times every day. Please tell me there are self-respecting professionals still employed in the editorial department.

washingtonpost.com: Democrats Back Down On Iraq Timetable (Post, May 3)

Howard Kurtz: People here make mistakes, as at every other news organization on the planet. Corrections run on Page 2 and are not just "buried" in archives; maybe it should have run on Page 1. The mistake seems to be in the description of when and where a Democratic concession took place. Here it is:

A May 3 Page One article about negotiations between President Bush and congressional Democrats over a war spending bill said the Democrats offered the first major concession by dropping their demand that the bill it include a deadline to bring troops home from Iraq. While Democrats are no longer pushing a firm date for troop withdrawals, party leaders did not specifically make that concession during a Wednesday meeting with Bush at the White House.

_______________________

Seattle: Howard Kurtz: I thought George Stephanopoulos really pushed Edwards hard yesterday on being wobbly and inconsistent. Any animus here? Why so hard on this issue so early?

Howard Kurtz: I think Stephanopoulos was just being an aggressive interviewer. Here's some of what he asked:

"There seems to be a pattern of that in this campaign, and, and your opponents have pointed out several issues where you've taken different positions from what you took in the past, point out you voted for the No Child Left Behind Act back when you were in the Senate. Now, you call that a mistake.

"You voted for free trade with China back when you were in the Senate. Now, you say you wouldn't do that. You voted for, when you were in the Senate, storing nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain in Nevada. Now, you say you're against that. Of course, the Nevada caucuses are gonna be quite early this time. In the Senate, you voted for bankruptcy reform. Now, you say that was a mistake. You realize it hurts the poor.

"That's a lot of mistakes admitted on big issues for a single term in the Senate. How do you explain it?"

_______________________

Chicago: In all the interviews I've seen with George Tenet he gets questioned about the July 2001 meeting with Condoleezza Rice about the need to take action. Tenet mentions he never mentioned his concerns to Bush. I wondered why no one (that I have seen) asked him what his relationship was with Clinton, or Gore, and if this had happened in 2000 would he have mentioned it to Clinton or if Gore was president would he have mentioned to Gore? Would that be considered an out-of-bounds question, or too speculative? I'd be interested in the answer.

Howard Kurtz: I think that would be a good question, even though the evidence that Tenet says he obviously had changed between the late '90s and 2001.

_______________________

Atlanta: Howie, from David Halberstam's "The Best and The Brightest," regarding how Joe McCarthy got started on his anti-communist crusade (p. 118):

"Around the country he flew, reckless and audacious, stopping long enough to make a new charge, to exhibit a new list, a good newsworthy press conference at the airport, hail-fellow well met with the reporters, and then on to the next stop, the emptiness of the charge never catching up with him, the American press exploited in its false sense of objectivity (if a high official said something, then it was news, if not fact, and the role of the reporter was to print it straight without commenting, without assaulting the credibility of the incredulous; that was objectivity)."

You and the politics reporters are always saying in these chats that this is exactly what the reporter's role is: to report who said what and let the reader figure it out for him/herself. This is the philosophy that got us into Iraq. It is also the philosophy that allows Dick Cheney to make speeches, to this day, about the connection between Iraq and 9/11 and go unchallenged. The same philosophy that allows Condi Rice to go on all the Sunday talk shows last week and not be challenged (except for Stephanopoulos). The same philosophy that allows Bush to repeat constantly that the Democrats don't support the troops because of timelines in the funding bill. Please explain how this so-called objectivity is serving the public, as it served the public so well in the McCarthy era.

Howard Kurtz: Forgive me, but I never have said that the reporter's job is to report who says what and let readers figure it out for themselves. We certainly have an obligation to fairly report what all sides say, but we also have a truth-squad function, to investigate what they say, compare it to the record and to past statements and to point out omissions, inconsistencies and untruths. That is the definition of aggressive reporting. It is not a standard we always live up to, but it should be the standard we aspire to.

_______________________

San Francisco: The correction to the "Dems in disarray" story has not been picked up by the multiple outlets that ran with Weisman and Murray's original story. Does The Post make any effort to track the "pickups" when an error has been made, in order to ensure the correction flies as far?

Howard Kurtz: I don't know, but The Post certainly sends out corrections to all news outlets that subscribe to its wire service. The same thing happens when the AP, the New York Times or any other news organization that syndicates material makes a mistake. It's the responsibility of the papers that publish the original stories to run the corrections.

_______________________

Rolla, Mo.: Granted different networks, but Stephanopoulos would have been preferable to Chris "what would it be like to have Bill Clinton back in the White House" Matthews.

Howard Kurtz: I didn't think much of that question, which the Republican candidates just used as an opportunity to attack Hillary.

_______________________

"U.S. has trouble cracking 50": Uh ... he was commenting on media trivialization of elections and candidates, not on comparative U.S. voting patterns. Trying to shift that focus is a dodge.

Howard Kurtz: But how do you measure media trivialization? I certainly think it's fair to point to such facts as what percentage of people vote. There's plenty of trivialization in American political coverage, and I make a living by pointing it out. But can anyone who carefully reads The Washington Post or New York Times, along with magazines, Web sites and blogs, say by Election Day that they don't know the positions of the candidates on the issues?

_______________________

New York: Howard, if you were a sports scribe in New York, what would be your lead on the "Clemens Returns to Yankees" story? (The more cynical, the better.)

Howard Kurtz: ROCKET MAN RETURNS FROM OUTER SPACE TO GRAB BIG BUCKS FROM TEAM HE DUMPED

_______________________

Anonymous: Hi, Howard. We hear incessantly about how this group or that group is funded by George Soros, as though that fact, by itself, proves the group's political affiliations. But those groups do not purport to be nonpartisan newspapers or sources of news. The Politico claims exactly that. Surely it is notable that those who created The Politico, who are funding it, and who are in charge of its operations, are long-time Republican operatives and those firmly implanted in right-wing circles. What do you think?

Howard Kurtz: If John Harris, Jim VandeHei, Mike Allen and Roger Simon are longtime Republican operatives, somehow it's escaped my notice.

_______________________

Too much campaign too early: What is going on with these early debates? I blame it on the 24-hour cable news -- they just want to talk about something. And yes, I am one of those cheap people without cable, and I still like to blame them. What do you think explains this? We are a year-and-a-half out -- I can't imagine what next May will be like. Does the average American really care about this stuff? I am here to tell all Americans that what you owe on your car or have saved for retirement is way more important than abortion rights.

Howard Kurtz: Well, there were a lot of questions on abortion at the Republican debate. And the campaign has started absurdly early. But for once, I don't think this is the media's fault, not when you've got three of the candidates raising more than $20 million apiece in just the past three months and some candidates already dropping out because they can't compete in the money primary. The staging of these debates is a symptom, not a cause, of how hard the candidates are running at this early juncture.

_______________________

Gulf Shores, Ala.: Good Afternoon: What is this deal with Anderson Cooper and now Lou Dobbs working for CBS? Is this good or bad for the media when we see the same faces over and over again? Is this CBS's lazy way of getting ratings instead of actually getting new people with maybe some fresh ideas, or is that to much to hope for in the media world of today?

Howard Kurtz: Cooper is an occasional contributor to "60 Minutes" and Dobbs an occasional guest on "The Early Show." And CNN's Sanjay Gupta is now a contributor to the "CBS Evening News." I don't see it as that big a deal.

_______________________

Philadelphia: Many people were annoyed by Mike Gravel's bizarre behavior during the Democratic debate, and others found it difficult to keep track of the 10(!) candidates on stage during the GOP debate. At what point show lesser candidates be kicked off the stage? And on what grounds?

Howard Kurtz: Gravel was entertaining, to be sure, but I don't know why media organizations feel some grave responsibility to put every self-declared candidate on the stage. (And I sure wish MSNBC had flashed each of the 10 candidates' names when they were talking, as it was hard even for the junkies to keep some of them straight.) I'd have no problem with a network using some kind of polling or fundraising benchmark to limit the debates to people who actually have at least an outside shot at becoming president of the United States. Fox is talking about doing this in the next Republican debate; we'll have to see.

_______________________

New York: Is there some sort of directive at The Post requiring a story about Cho every single day? Enough is a enough already. Take a day off.

washingtonpost.com: Cho Didn't Get Court-Ordered Treatment (Post, May 7)

Howard Kurtz: You're not going to get me to criticize original reporting on the worst gun massacre in U.S. history that took place in one of the three jurisdictions we cover. I was glad that the media mob moved on from Blacksburg, Va. after the first week, but it's increasingly clear that there was a complete systems failure in how Cho was handled, such as the Virginia gun loophole involving those previously committed to mental institutions, which the state's governor has now closed.

_______________________

Washington: Wow, harsh crowd today. On a different note, what do you think over the coverage of the visit by the Queen of England (and the coverage of the coverage)? It does seem a bit odd that the press as a whole is going as full-bore with this as they are when it seems like a fairly large portion of the populace doesn't care very much. At the same time all of the people going "tut tut" over it seem to have their own axe to grind. Any thoughts?

Howard Kurtz: I've been trying to figure out how much public interest there is. The Queen seems like a perfectly nice lady, and I know many Americans are fascinated by British royalty, but I must say I haven't been on the edge of my seat.

_______________________

Alexandria, Va.: In your column today, you quote CBS reporter Byron Pitts quoting a freshman English teacher who told him to stop wasting "the government's money." I hate to sound cynical, but that's quite difficult to verify and necessarily must not be taken on face value, particularly because Ohio Wesleyan is a private, not state-funded, school. Did Pitts explain to you in what way he was receiving taxpayer assistance for the professor in question to bring that up?

Howard Kurtz: I am not just taking Byron Pitts's word for it. I interviewed another school official, on the record, who was told this by Pitts right after it happened.

_______________________

Arlington, Va.: Hi, Howard -- thanks for the chat. Every day there seems to be a story about some presidential primary changing to an earlier date -- and they are piling up on top of each other earlier and earlier as a result. How on earth will primary voters get to know the candidates in time to cast informed and well-considered votes with that kind of stampede going on? The media can't stop the madness, but they can help alleviate it by giving maximum coverage to any event, such as debates, that can give voters solid exposure to the candidates. Yet it seems like debates and so on are locked in to coverage by just a couple of outlets -- like the GOP debate last week, when MSNBC and politico.com were the only outlets. That's an awfully narrow slice of coverage. What can the media do about this? This year it could be a really serious problem -- we could end up with two nominees whom nobody knows more than superficially. Your thoughts?

Howard Kurtz: The calendar is getting out of control and this whole thing is turning into a national primary. From my perspective, that means candidates running a tarmac campaign based on sound bites and ads as they jet from one megastate to another, at the expense of the town halls and living room campaigning that have marked New Hampshire and Iowa. But the parties seem unable to enforce a rational schedule. I can assure you, though, that there will have been no shortage of candidate debates by the time this is over.

_______________________

Richmond, Va.: Just a thought, but perhaps media trivialization has some effect on voting turnout. When the so much of the focus is on Botox, haircuts, and the like, rather than substantive issues, it does make one question why an election matters so much -- and decrease the perceived importance of voting. I'm not saying that issues don't get any coverage, but if I see one more story cite a haircut or choice of attire, I may vomit. We're counting on the media to delve into the issues -- if we wanted fashion advice, there are certainly other sources.

Howard Kurtz: I don't disagree. But the media is a big beast. Some places are more trivial than others.

_______________________

Washington: Just a quick note to say I'm glad to see someone else -- besides me -- cares about the news yet doesn't have cable or satellite TV. For me, it's a financial decision: In my high-rise, only one carrier is available and it's $65 a month without "premium" channels; that's $780 a year! I wish PBS would go back to covering important events live, instead of assuming we all can turn on C-SPAN or CNN. The broadcast networks seem to limit their live coverage to police matters -- massacres, car chases, celebrity deaths like that of Anna Nicole Smith's. Do you agree that public TV has abdicated some of its responsibility to its viewers? Thanks!

Howard Kurtz: There's no question that the broadcast networks are pretty much out of the live coverage business, having ceded that turf to the cable networks long ago. That is primarily a business decision, as it costs them big bucks to preempt their lucrative entertainment programming to cover breaking news. The networks each added an hour or two of programming after the Virginia Tech massacre, but that was it. In television terms, cable is where the action is these days.

_______________________

San Francisco: Your opinion, please, on Brian Ross's big buildup for last Friday's "20/20"? Will other media outlets accept ABC's word that the names are boring? Is anyone investigating this story now, or have you all decided there's nothing to see here, move along? Made any calls to Blockbuster lately?

Howard Kurtz: Unless ABC wants to give me the phone records, I have no way of double-checking its judgment on the escort clients. It did sound like some fairly important people -- CEOs, NASA officials, military officials -- were on the list, but ABC deemed them not prominent enough to be newsworthy. ABC certainly acted with restraint, but it's interesting that prominence is the standard on whether these people should be named or not.

_______________________

Seattle: I don't know if you look at the foreign press, But last week Zoe Williams in The Guardian had an article claiming that Bernstein's new book on Hilary is an example of the misogyny of the American press. Basically she said the American press were the equivalent of British tabloids. I have not read Bernstein's book, I confess (is it out?) but do you think the American press has an unconscious misogyny?

washingtonpost.com: A Slur and an Outrage (The Guardian, May 2)

Howard Kurtz: Bernstein's book isn't out, which makes it impossible for me to judge, and the Guardian column struck me as odd for that reason.

_______________________

San Diego: The night the St. Louis Cardinals pitcher died in a drunk driving accident, he spoke at length with Dave Campbell, an ESPN baseball analyst. Campbell initially maintained that he didn't see anything unusual and refused to divulge the content of their conversation which, reportedly, had to do in part with the pitcher's drinking. Does Campbell have any responsibility beyond the normal person in this matter because of his role in the media? Should ESPN discipline him?

Howard Kurtz: I was unaware of this. If that's the case, I think he has a responsibility as a journalist to tell us everything he knows.

_______________________

Re: Pitts: Most private colleges receive federal funding (this is why they have to comply with federal antidiscrimination laws and the Solomon Amendment).

Howard Kurtz: That was how I took it.

_______________________

Greenville, S.C.: Howie -- what is the origin of the Democratic Party feeling dissed when referred to as the "Democrat" party?

Howard Kurtz: It's a short, clipped version of the party's actual name. How hard is it to use the full name, Greeny? I noticed Bush doing it again last week, after saying after the State of the Union, when he was making something of a bipartisan appeal, that he did not do it intentionally.

_______________________

Liberal Republicans: Why is that the term conservative democrats seems so prevalent, while you never hear about liberal Republicans? Left-leaning Republicans seemed to be described as moderate, while right-leaning Democrats are described as conservative. Are there really no liberal Republicans?

Howard Kurtz: There used to be a whole bunch of liberal Republicans, especially in the Northeast -- Jacob Javits, Claiborne Pell, Clifford Case and so on. But as they lost their seats and the party moved to the right, the group really shrunk. Redistricting also tended to produce more conservative Republicans and liberal Democrats as the parties carved up the turf.

_______________________

Washington: "If that's the case, I think he has a responsibility as a journalist to tell us everything he knows."

Can you please explain why you think this? I don't see the point of revealing someone who died had an alcohol problem. They clearly no longer have that problem. Or are they saying the alcohol problem may have contributed to the death? If so I understand.

Howard Kurtz: The responsibility is to the public, not because the person had an alcohol problem but because the death of a professional athlete is news.

_______________________

Southeast Michigan: Hi, I love your column and these weekly chats always are very interesting, too. I just wanted to say I enjoyed reading the article on Byron Pitts -- he has a very inspiring story.

Howard Kurtz: A positive comment! Give me a little time to calm down.

Okay, there. Thanks very much. It was nice to be able to tell that particular story, which I stumbled on by accident.

Thanks for the chat, folks.

_______________________

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. washingtonpost.com is not responsible for any content posted by third parties.