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."

The transcript follows.

Media Backtalk transcripts archive

____________________

What "the media" covers: Howard: One common complaint you receive is that the "mainstream media" isn't covering something that the writer views as important. You inevitably point out that they wouldn't know about it if the media hadn't already covered it. I think these people are usually basing their view on what the media covers from what they see on cable news. For example, right now CNN is giving virtually non-stop coverage to the California fires, which are bad for sure, but are they really as important as Iraq, the GOP debates last night, Pakistan, etc.? It just seems to me that the first source of news for many people, especially those who are particularly active on things like these chats, is cable news. Do you agree?

Howard Kurtz: I just checked and at this very moment Fox and MSNBC are also covering the California wildfires. I'd rather see that than the latest Britney or Lindsay nonsense. Cable TV is usually all over hurricanes, tornados, floods, wildfires and even really bad snowstorms -- they're easy to cover and produce colorful footage. I always wonder how much interest there is in the other 49 states when there's a weather disaster in the 50th state. I also wonder whether there would be as much coverage if Malibu wasn't one of the country's richest areas and the home to many big-name celebrities.

_______________________

Bethesda, Md.: Howard -- thanks for doing these chats. Not to elevate their status, but do they ever influence what you do on "Reliable Sources"? In other words, does a particular line of questioning on Monday ever cause you to investigate a topic and then have it on the weekend show?

Howard Kurtz: Sure. Everything I see -- in papers, online, blogs, cable -- goes into the great Cuisinart and helps shape my coverage and what I decide to pursue.

_______________________

Chicago: I'd greatly appreciate your feedback on this: It appears to me that the network evening news broadcasts are (to a larger degree than ever before) following the "News You Can Use" playbook that was once the strategy of the local stations. In other words, after a few minutes of Iraq/D.C. news ... the remainder of the broadcast is delivered virtually in "second person" ... here's what you need to know before you go to the doctor; here's what you need to know to keep your kids safe; here's what you need to know before you go on vacation. I don't think it's the best use of the media to simply tell us about our own lives, but to tell us about the world around us. To me, that's the real echo chamber. We're just getting news that applies to our own lives.

Howard Kurtz: Having just watched two years worth of these broadcasts while researching my books Reality Show, I can't tell you how many segments I sat through on all manner of diseases; predators online; caring for the elderly (including a segment on Brian Williams' father); women balancing work and family, and the various problems of baby boomers (a special series on two of the newscasts). Sometimes I found these pieces well done and using personal stories to illuminate larger issues; at other times I found them cliched and predictable. And they were almost always aimed at older viewers. But what exactly is wrong with the newscasts trying to report on issues that touch people's lives?

_______________________

Atlanta: Mr. Kurtz. I've been a huge fan since I was 12. My question is: do you think the Stephen Colbert "candidacy" will have any real implications on the South Carolina race on either side of the aisle?

Howard Kurtz: Well, Colbert was on "Meet the Press" yesterday. I'm sure a number of the second-tier candidates would have liked that precious air time.

But aside from media attention, if the question is whether he will attract a significant number of votes in the South Carolina primary, I don't know. I've heard a couple of veteran political reporters say he could draw a solid protest vote among college-age kids. And even a modest showing could tip the balance in a close contest.

_______________________

Harrisburg, Pa.: The Washington Post book review of your latest book seemed to fault you for not having enough footnotes. Yet, when you mention conversations with people, aren't they from direct interviews and thus they do not require attribution as the source is obvious? Or, if I have this wrong, what is the explanation for the claim that your last book has few sources (and one could argue, quality is better than quantity anyway)?

Howard Kurtz: There were dozens of footnotes; I footnoted every scrap of information that I got from somewhere else. But you're right, the bulk of the book is based on my own reporting, interviews, and time spent observing the process at NBC, CBS and ABC (plus Comedy Central!)

_______________________

Chicago: I haven't read your book, but I certainly intend to. Perhaps you address this in the book ... when CBS was in the process of hiring K. Couric, there was some brief discussion (attributed to Les Moonves, I believe) of drastically revamping the format of the CBS Evening News. If Katie Couric doesn't stay on the job much longer ... what are the odds that CBS stays with a "typical" news broadcast? If so, what do you think is a practical, but still "different," kind of broadcast? Hiring someone like Jon Stewart? More commentary? Or is there any chance that the CBS national broadcast simply goes away, and they turn that time over to their affiliates?

Howard Kurtz: I feel safe in saying that Jon Stewart is not going to be the next anchor of the CBS Evening News. (That's in part because he just signed a contract with Comedy Central that runs through 2010.) In the book I describe how CBS staffers made two pilots with fairly radical changes when Moonves wanted a fresh look at the evening news, but discarded them. But Couric herself introduced a lot of changes -- "Free Speech" soapbox segments, interesting "Snapshots," items from the Web -- but abandoned them when it became clear that the core audience felt it was being shortchanged on the hard news front. Given that experience, I doubt we'll see CBS making a major departure from the traditional format for some time to come, regardless of who is in the chair.

_______________________

Harrisburg, Pa.: Isn't a problem with cable news that it is not around-the-clock news reporting, but around-the-clock recycled news? Why hasn't someone created a cable news station that allows for longer insights into major stories, i.e. focus on the major issues with discussions from an array of experts and a look at the events behind the story? I know it would not get the ratings, but it would serve a market for those who want to know more about our news in-depth.

Howard Kurtz: I've often wondered why there aren't more five-minute or eight-minute stories on cable news, given the luxury of time that they enjoy, rather than the two-minute pieces we see on the broadcast networks. Part of the answer is that longer stories take more time and money to develop, and part is that producers feel they have to keep things moving quickly and that the audience doesn't have the attention span for longer pieces. I wonder, though, whether that's true.

_______________________

Washington: The review of your book in yesterday's Post was pretty much a puff piece, eh? Has there ever been a bad review of a book in The Post when the book was written by someone who worked at The Post? I can't recall one off-hand. Now, one possibility is that you are all geniuses. Are you really, or are the book review editors just very careful whom they ask to review the books by Post employees?

Howard Kurtz: There absolutely have been negative reviews of books written by Post staffers. Trust me -- I've gotten a couple. The reviews are assigned to independent critics who can say whatever they want, and I did not know until I picked up yesterday's paper who was reviewing "Reality Show."

_______________________

Washington: During the Valerie Plame piece on "60 Minutes" last night, Katie Couric dutifully noted that Plame's book is being published by Simon & Schuster, which is owned by CBS (or they are both owned by a corporate parent, I forget). I wondered if maybe this should be stated up front, in the intro to the piece, instead of dropped in off-hand in the middle. I also wonder if there's more to it than that -- who makes the decision to produce the piece in the first place: does Simon & Schuster request it, or does CBS decide to pursue it because it's newsworthy (and because the corporate hierarchy makes it easier than if "Dateline NBC" wanted to do a similar piece)? Was CBS access a factor in Plame's decision to go with Simon & Schuster?

Howard Kurtz: I'm glad it was disclosed, in whatever fashion. And yes, "60 Minutes" has gotten the exclusive on a number of Simon & Schuster books. But what author wouldn't want to be featured on "60 Minutes," the highest-rated and most respected of the newsmagazine shows? In other words, prominent authors would want to be on regardless of who published their book. Clarence Thomas is the most recent example.

_______________________

Avon Park, Fla.: Do you happen to know why CNBC cancelled the Chris Matthews show on Sundays and Tim Russert's show on Saturday nights?

Howard Kurtz: Matthews's Sunday show is syndicated, and Russert's program has just been shifted from CNBC to MSNBC.

_______________________

Hillary and the media: Howard: I greatly enjoy reading your work but I do think you reflect the conventional wisdom-type thinking of the mainstream media. For example, in today's online column, you say: "Hillary obviously has some baggage, but I doubt that dredging up Bill scandals is going to work. I mean, it's not exactly new information." Do you really think all of the questions about their past actions have been answered and resolved? If so, why are the Clintons so anxious to block access to their records? Please note, I'm a Democrat. How do you think the Republicans feel about this?

washingtonpost.com: Journalism Morsels Make for Profitable Dish at This Bistro (washingtonpost.com, Oct. 22)

Howard Kurtz: Has every scandal that Hillary or Bill Clinton were involved in been definitively resolved? Of course not (although Whitewater was pretty thoroughly investigated by a guy named Ken Starr). Will the opposition try to revive such issues as the Rose Law Firm billing records and Hillary's commodity trading in an effort to discredit her? Obviously. My point was that these are old issues that were fully aired during the '90s and would come as no surprise to anyone who hasn't been living in a cave. I think most people have made up their minds, pro and con, about those scandals and their importance or lack thereof.

_______________________

Louisiana: U.S. Rep. Bobby Jindal became the nation's youngest governor and the first non-white to hold post in Louisiana since Reconstruction when he carried more than half the vote to defeat 11 opponents. Jindal, the Republican 36-year-old son of Indian immigrants, had 53 percent with 625,036 votes with about 92 percent of the vote tallied. If he were a Democrat, would this be getting more play on the national stage?

Howard Kurtz: I think Jindal is a great story who deserves more coverage. I don't think his party affiliation is a factor. Many news organizations may have been caught off-guard by the fact that he won the election outright with more than 50 percent of the vote rather than being forced into a runoff in December.

_______________________

Just the facts: I really appreciate The Washington Post's feature on fact-checking. A few bumpy moments, but just having someone actually investigate all sides to an issue and identify different sources of information is valuable to me. Do you know if there are other (major) media outlets that have a similar feature? And as for yesterday's "Meet the Press," I though Russert let Colbert off easy on adopting that "French" pronunciation of his last name. (But, you gotta admit, Tim RooSayre has quite a ring to it!)

washingtonpost.com: Blog: The Fact-Checker (washingtonpost.com)

Howard Kurtz: A number of major newspapers regularly do the truth-squadding thing, but I'm not sure anyone has branded it the way The Post has. CNN runs an occasional segment called Reality Check.

_______________________

Gulf Shores, Ala.: It seems to me that since Petraeus and Crocker testified that the surge was showing progress Iraq has been on the slow burner. Is it just me or is there less coverage of the war?

Howard Kurtz: A recent study showed that coverage of the war had declined in recent months, especially on television. Some of that may stem from producers and executives concluding that the audience is suffering from Iraq fatigue. Another factor, though, is that in recent months there have been relatively few of the major suicide bombings that kill 50 or 100 or 150 people in one awful event, and invariably draw major coverage. That doesn't mean, of course, that we should curtail our coverage of the war.

_______________________

Boston: Has Drudge ever posted a correction or retraction? Has anyone ever sued him for something he has posted (and is he liable for posting what someone else has written if it is proven to be slander/libel)?

Howard Kurtz: Drudge has occasionally corrected postings. The most prominent example is from the late 1990s, when he falsely accused then-White House aide Sid Blumenthal of spouse abuse, leading to a lawsuit that was ultimately settled.

_______________________

Alexandria, Va.: Howard -- have you followed the case of the local Fox news reporter in Dallas who interviewed a 70-year-old man who had shot and killed intruders twice in three weeks? She was suspended for some of her tactics in interviewing the 70-year-old man -- "are you trigger-happy?" Will she be fired? What about the producers who put the segment on the air?

Howard Kurtz: I have followed it. The woman has defended herself, saying that the man was willing to talk but that the video that circulated online made it look as though she were badgering him. You're certainly right, though, that no videotape gets on the air without executives approving it, so it's interesting that only the reporter herself is taking the fall on this one.

_______________________

Ashland, Mo.: The NPR/Kaiser/Harvard poll notes that 31 percent of the public has heard nothing about the SCHIP program and 21 percent has heard only a little. If that is accurate, is it really appropriate for you and others to conclude 70 percent of the public supports it? And should it reinforce the notion that large segments of the public have tuned out Washington, making the events inside the Beltway less important than those living there, and covering events there, think?

Howard Kurtz: Well, I agree with the second part of your statement. We live in a bubble here and sometimes have the misimpression that people at water-coolers across America are debating SCHIP. But it was a respected poll, I believe by CBS, which found that 80 percent of those questioned support the Democrats' effort to expand the program. Those polls contain little summaries of what is being asked (Bush vetoing a program to expand children's health insurance), so you might get a higher recognition factor than just asking people if they know what SCHIP is.

_______________________

Bobby Jindal: Let's be real -- Bobby Jindal won because 175,000 African-Americans have moved out of Louisiana because of Katrina. They were reliable Democratic voters and would have been the difference.

Howard Kurtz: That migration obviously hurt the Democrats. But for a candidate to win 54 percent of the vote rather than being forced into a runoff is still a significant accomplishment.

_______________________

Portland, Ore.: Re: Colbert ... while everyone knows his candidacy is supposed to be a joke, I recollect that when comedian Pat Paulsen of "Laugh-In" fame did the same thing in 1968 that he collected tens of thousands of votes. Paulsen, according to his obit in The Washington Post, said he ran into Hubert Humphrey several years later and that Humphrey told Paulsen he had cost him the election in his razor-thin loss to Nixon and, according to Paulsen, "he wasn't smiling when he said it." If true, how should reporters treat Colbert's candidacy? I'm sure Russert thought it was all good fun when he had Colbert on "Meet the Press," but I worry a jaded press corp, anxious for some comic relief, could influence the election by giving Colbert this attention. Call me humorless, but I see this as an especially important election that is already too focused on minutiae over substance.

Howard Kurtz: I'm sure Colbert will get more media attention than other candidates with no hope of winning the nomination who don't happen to have popular late-night shows. He is, after all, running in both the Democratic and Republican primaries in South Carolina. Voters, of course, are free to blow off his candidacy.

_______________________

Matt Lauer/Sen. Craig: After this interview drew ratings that would make a test pattern embarrassed, will the news organization leave this story alone? Is the reason for lack of ratings that few believe Craig's implausible story? Is it because of the small population of his state?

Howard Kurtz: Whether Matt Lauer's sit-down with Larry Craig was a ratings winner or not, it's still an important story. Here you have a senator who pleaded guilty to, in effect, soliciting sex in a men's room, announced that he was going to resign, and now is refusing to resign and making a (futile thus far) attempt to overturn his plea. Craig has become an embarrassment to the Republican Party, which would like him to fade away, and a national punch line. And his critics continue to accuse him of hypocrisy on gay issues. That sounds like an important story to me.

_______________________

Seattle: On the topic of fact-checking, how do you prevent one side from "wagging the dog," i.e. staking claim to an outrageously extreme interpretation of the facts so that the middle ground between the two sides is out of line with what's reasonable?

Howard Kurtz: That's not the goal of fact-checking. Candidate A makes a claim, and no matter what Candidate B's interpretation is, our effort is to examine what the actual facts are, as best as can be determined, and compare that to Candidate A's statement or commercial or press release. It's not a split-the-difference situation.

_______________________

Reading, Pa.: Why is the media so obsessed with Britney Spears? Is it because she is a train wreck and so many people secretly enjoy the sorrows of an obviously mentally ill person? What does that say about our society? Also, does it seem to you that we are becoming more like ancient Rome in our tastes for blood and violence in our entertainment? The amount of "fighting" shows and pay-per-views is just disgusting in my opinion -- where's Tipper Gore when we need her?

Howard Kurtz: I suppose there is a twisted fascination in watching today's bad girls (Britney, Paris, Lindsay) slowly ruin their lives and get into scrapes with the law. But you'll notice that it's almost entirely a television (and online) phenomenon. Producers have discovered they can get a short-term ratings bump by showing that B-roll of Britney performing in her bra-and-panties outfit for the thousandth time, even though I think it alienates part of the larger audience.

Thanks for the chat, folks.

_______________________

Editor's Note: washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over 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.