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

____________________

Washington: I cannot believe the White House spokesman's response to the FEMA "press conference" was that the White House wouldn't do it with staffers pretending to be journalists asking questions. The White House response should have been "it was wrong" -- that's it, nothing else. It was wrong. And they wonder why FEMA is the butt of jokes?

washingtonpost.com: FEMA Meets the Press, Which Happens to Be ... FEMA (Post, Oct. 26)

Howard Kurtz: Michael Chertoff, who oversees FEMA as the Homeland Security chief, says the bogus news conference is the dumbest thing he's seen in government in a long time, and I agree. How anyone at FEMA thought this was a remotely acceptable idea, and thought they could get away with it, boggles the imagination. (Especially since FEMA's response to the California wildfires had been decent, and now this is the only thing anyone will remember.) But I don't think it's fair to blame the White House for this. Dana Perino made it quite clear that the White House did not approve of this make-believe event.

_______________________

Honolulu, Hawaii: Aloha Howard. I know you mentioned the phony press conference from FEMA last week. It seems like it took a while to gain much traction, with more talk about it over the weekend than during the week. Has there ever been such a naked example of how the administration regards the media's role (as stenographers who are only to "listen and repeat")? And does looking at it that way make one a liberal? What's a reporter's gut response to finding out about this?

Howard Kurtz: First of all, Al Kamen broke that story in his Post column on Friday morning, and it took no time for everyone to pick up on it. The faux FEMA event was on all three network newscasts that evening, and naturally there was talk about it over the weekend, including on my show. (I notice the New York Times gave it only a few grafs; wonder if it would have been more newsworthy had the Times gotten it first.)

I have wondered whether this fraudulent presser represented the administration's secret fantasy, an official at the podium without having to deal with pesky reporters. But again, it's unfair to blame anyone other than the short-sighted folks at FEMA for this fiasco. The question I have is whether any heads will roll. This was, after all, a form of lying to the public.

To me, this isn't a liberal or conservative issue. I wrote a book on the Clinton White House's spin machine. Imagine the thunder on the right had any agency under Clinton attempted something like this.

_______________________

Manassas, Va.: Yesterday on CNN, you said Rudy Giuliani "wouldn't shut up" about being a Yankees fan, and so the New York tabs put his sudden Red Sox rooting on the front page. But Hillary just said in an MSNBC debate that she'd have to root for both the Cubs and the Yankees if they both made the World Series. I didn't see you (or the tabs) mock her flip-flopping. Is it different because she's a female candidate?

Howard Kurtz: Are you serious? I was talking about Rudy's historic flip-flop because the New York tabloids were calling him a traitor and a redcoat for saying (in New Hampshire, naturally) that he'd root for the Red Sox in the World Series. I don't remember if I joined in the ridicule of Hillary for her Yankees/Cubs fudge, but just the other day I jabbed her for telling an interviewer that she knows about piling on (by her critics) because that happened to her when she played touch football. Except that you're considered down when an opposing player touches you with two hands, so there is no piling on. Maybe they should all steer clear of sports questions.

_______________________

Chicago:"But I don't think it's fair to blame the White House for this. Dana Perino made it quite clear that the White House did not approve of this make-believe event." Given the Karen Ryan and Jeff Gannon incidents, I'm more than willing to assume the White House would have no objection to a stunt like this.

Howard Kurtz: You can assume what you'd like, but no one has produced evidence that anyone outside FEMA knew of this monumentally bad idea.

_______________________

New York: Was Karen Ryan one of the "journalists" at the FEMA press conference? That's just my snarky way of pointing out that FEMA is not the only agency in the Bush administration to use fake reporters.

Howard Kurtz: That is true. She is a PR person who appeared in a Health and Human Services video release and signed off with "In Washington, I'm Karen Ryan reporting." Any TV station that used that piece of propaganda should be ashamed.

_______________________

Mt. Lebanon, Pa.: Things happen so quickly then they stall out -- haven't been keeping up since the original hubbub. Please remind me: The Murdoch buyout of the Wall Street Journal happened? He's already ensconced in the throne room? Reporters have quit willy nilly; new ones with the right bent have already been hired? The pages have already been made over? It looks like a thicker version of the New York Post? How far down the rabbit hole here (above) have we fallen? Thanks much.

Howard Kurtz: It's a done deal but it hasn't formally closed yet, so Murdoch isn't in charge yet (though he's visited the newsroom and talked with editors and reporters). A few reporters have quit to accept other offers, despite, in a couple of cases, personal appeals from Rupert. I don't know if any have been hired, but undoubtedly more will be, as Murdoch is talking about expanding the Journal's coverage of politics and culture.

_______________________

Crestwood, N.Y.: Howard, I'm so, so naive. I thought that after 2000, that the media had disavowed the "nice friendly guy/condescending stiff" dichotomy of reporting that has served our country so well. Silly me. It looks like Huckabee is one strong primary showing away from coronation, with no serious look at his prior record or positions. A nice guy, right? What else do we poor saps have to know?

Howard Kurtz: If the recent pundit gushing over Huckabee translates into higher poll numbers, there will be a second wave in which news organizations take a serious look at the man's record. We've seen a couple of instances of that -- journalists reporting that he has a Willie Horton problem (a rapist he paroled went on to sexually assault and kill another woman) and that the governor was spanked several times by the state ethics commission in Arkansas. Media outlets rarely investigate the records of second-tier candidates because they're pouring resources into looking at the perceived front-runners. Only when someone breaks into the top tier, as Howard Dean did four years ago, does the scrutiny get serious.

_______________________

Anonymous: FEMA -- of course you can blame the White House, if for nothing else because they vetted the political leadership that thought this was a good idea. They are Bush's people, they operate in an atmosphere that lead someone there to think this would be okay. That atmosphere is the White House's creation.

Howard Kurtz: Well, you certainly can blame the president for appointing FEMA's leaders, no question about that.

_______________________

Anonymous: Did either Fox or MSNBC advise their viewers before, during or after the fake news conference about what was going on? Has either justified their coverage (or apologized)? Many years ago I worked for a foreign affairs agency that had regular satellite news conferences for foreign journalists, with guests based in Washington. After many rather routine, non-news-making conferences, most journalists stopped coming, but there was pressure from Washington (especially the famous Charles Wick) to get questioners. In one instance, a representative from a U.S. Embassy asked a question (not disclosing his position, as I recall). The reaction, including from Washington, was swift, and the incident was not repeated.

Howard Kurtz: As I understand it, Fox and MSNBC didn't know the presser was fake at the time. If they had, I sincerely doubt they would have aired it.

_______________________

New York: What is your comment on the unbelievable e-mail exchange between Col. Boylan, Gen. Petraeus' chief spokesman, and Glenn Greenwald at Salon? Boylan sent him a rather weird e-mail, then denied sending it, even though it comes from the same IP address and official military e-mail account Boylan uses. Isn't this a big story -- either Col. Boylan is lying about having sent it, or someone is easily able to hack into our military's e-mail and send fake e-mails in the name of high-ranking officers! And what's your opinion of whether a journalist like Greenwald can or should publish e-mails between him and a government official without the official's permission? Boylan complained about that.

washingtonpost.com: A bizarre, unsolicited e-mail from Gen. Petraeus' spokesman (Salon, Oct. 28)

Howard Kurtz: It's a very strange tale. I'm not sure what to make of it. I think Boylan's complaint had more to do with the publication of what he contends is a fake e-mail sent by someone else. These days, government officials know that if they send an e-mail to a reporter or commentator it's going to be used, unless specifically marked as an off-the-record communication.

_______________________

Washington: When a news study of the campaign mixes up network news, talk radio and Web sites like Yahoo, and puts them together, is that a great representation of all the media people might sample? Or is it putting apples, oranges and tires in a blender -- in short, a mess? I'd be more interested in the media that less-attached voters are following, which ain't Rush Limbaugh's listeners.

Howard Kurtz: You are referring to this morning's column on a study of campaign coverage by the Project for Excellence in Journalism and Harvard's Shorenstein Center. I think such an approach is more representative of the media world we live in than studies that just put forth the network newscasts, or a handful of big newspapers, as representative of all media. Besides, if you dig into the report, as I did and as anyone can do online, you can see all the breakdowns: How the presidential candidates were covered just by the networks, the cable channels, the newspapers, radio or Web sites.

_______________________

Brian Williams: A hot week for him -- hosting a Democratic debate on MSNBC tomorrow and "Saturday Night Live" on Saturday night. Some overlap with the "Not Ready for Primetime Players" in both events.

Howard Kurtz: I think Brian needs to be funny on Saturday night and at the Tuesday debate, not so much.

_______________________

Mount Rainier, Md. -- FEMA fakes it!: While the FEMA news-fake-rence may be the worst of the worst ideas, it's not actually a new occurrence in this administration. The Department of Education has paid columnists to write favorably about its programs, and I recall at least one other agency releasing "fake" news stories produced inside the bureaucracy that ran on local television as legit news. I bet no one gets fired. What can we as citizens do to make sure the president and vice president understand that we won't tolerate this sort of thing?

Howard Kurtz: I don't know what average folks can do, but it's our job as journalists to expose this whenever we can. That happened in the case of Armstrong Williams, who was getting federal funding from the Education Department while talking up No Child Left Behind, and in the case of a couple of other commentators, one of which was a story that I broke. Governments are always going to push the envelope when it comes to influencing public opinion, and we need to play the role of honest cops.

_______________________

Silver Spring, Md.: There was an AP article that referred to Qualcomm Stadium as "civil" during the San Diego Fires compared to the Superdome during Katrina. That was an offensive comparison that attempted to portray the blacks in New Orleans as uncivilized when they were the victims of a failed system. There was just a better support system in San Diego. I think the circumstances in New Orleans would have made any group of people act the same way. The AP should offer an apology for the story.

Howard Kurtz: I don't see it as racial, but I do see it as apples and oranges. The fact is, the scene at the Louisiana Superdome was desperate and chaotic, while at San Diego's Qualcomm people were getting free Starbucks and massages and doing yoga. But let's be clear: Katrina flooded an area of 90,000 square miles, knocking out power and claiming the lives of more than 1,400 people; the California fires, while tragic, affected 700 square miles, killed 7 and left the surrounding infrastructure intact. So while California did a good job at Qualcomm, most evacuees drove there under their own power, and the situation was really not comparable to Katrina, despite some simple-minded comparisons in the media.

_______________________

Annandale, Va.: In recent weeks, the Redskins have warranted "above the fold" attention on the front page of the Monday Post. A stranger to these parts would have thought the team won the Super Bowl with such coverage. Why is it that The Post feels the team deserves such front page attention, especially for a regular season game against Arizona? Other world-renowned papers of record -- the New York Times for example -- do not go to such lengths. I know the 'Skins are big here, but come on ... the front page? What is the sports page for?

Howard Kurtz: The theory behind the Post's coverage of the Skins is that they're not just huge, they are a unifying force across a region in which many people come from somewhere else. The Times isn't a fair comparison, because virtually all of the Post's circulation is in the D.C. area, whereas perhaps a third of Times copies are sold in New York City. Having said that, there are times when we certainly overplay the Redskins. I could argue that the deciding game of the World Series is more important (especially when the Skins were going down in a 52-7 blowout).

_______________________

Re: Hillary's Yankees-Cubs "fudge": C'mon, Howard. In fact, Hillary Clinton has claimed the Yankees as her AL team for years now. Your very own newspaper reported in 1994 that she was a fan of the Yankees, and she was spotted in a Yankee cap as far back as 1992. Maybe the ones doing the "fudging" are the ones who keep rehashing this nonsense...

Howard Kurtz: Tim Russert asked her a hypothetical debate question about what she'd do if the Yanks played the Cubs in the World Series (not a problem this year, with both teams blown out), and she said she'd have to alternate. Don't blame me.

_______________________

Alexandria, Va.: What is the possibility now for a voter backlash against a guy like Huckabee? We've seen in these times that traditional media is is held in a different light. Now that mainstream media seem to have a candidate to push into the limelight from the background, will voters buy it?

Howard Kurtz: A voter backlash? Already? The Huckabee wave has really been led by a handful of pundits, such as Newsweek's Jonathan Alter and David Brooks of the New York Times. In fact, as I reported last week, it's already been countered by criticism from other pundits, mainly on the left. I doubt the average citizen even knows there's been a Huckabee boomlet, if indeed that average citizen knows who Mike Huckabee is. So it might be a tad early for the backlash.

_______________________

New York: Howard, does The Post have some sort of entry-level position for soon-to-be-former Yankee Alex Rodriguez? I understand he's easy to get along with and makes no demands whatsoever.

Howard Kurtz: We'll have to check on our budget for free agents.

_______________________

Oviedo, Fla.: As a kid I was dimly aware of the seemingly nightly stream of Vietnam news on the Cronkite broadcasts my parents never missed. Is there a similar amount of Iraq news on the most-watched news shows now? It seems like it is less, but of course my perspective is different as an adult. (Plus I cut off cable, as it was too stupid for what I was paying...) I believe the relentlessness of the Southeast Asia coverage finally pushed the public to favor the war's end. Will media coverage for today's dispersed audiences ever reach this fever pitch again, aside from nonsense stories like Britney's underwear?

Howard Kurtz: I argue in my new book "Reality Show" that the network newscasts have devoted an enormous amount of time to the war and helped turn public opinion against the conflict in 2005 and 2006. These newscasts, unlike cable, don't do much on the likes of Britney. We've also had Brian Williams and Katie Couric reporting from Iraq this year, and before that, Bob Woodruff and Kimberly Dozier, both of whom were badly injured by bombs. None of the newscasts commands anything like a Cronkite audience, not in an era when there are thousands of ways to get news and information. But the Big Three still reach a combined 25 million viewers each night, and that has impact.

_______________________

Westcliffe, Colo.: Does the Son of FEMA indicate that it's impossible to find FEMA-types who can lead, follow or get out of the way? By that I mean, does the Michael Brown-type seek out FEMA, or does it seek out the Brownies? A chicken-and-egg thing. If this is a universal constant, are we condemned to never have anyone at FEMA with a full load of bricks?

Howard Kurtz: Clinton's FEMA guy, James Lee Witt, widely was regarded as a strong administrator. So I don't think there's something in the water over there.

_______________________

"If the recent pundit gushing over Huckabee translates into higher poll numbers, there will be a second wave in which news organizations take a serious look at the man's record.": I'm sorry, but I find this answer either appalling or ridiculous. Why does it have to happen in waves, especially when the media by and large creates the first wave? Are we expected to believe that the media are so overworked and understaffed that they can't provide a real review of each candidate's stances on the issues and their past record right from the start?

Howard Kurtz: I agree. I'm not endorsing this approach. I'm just telling you how it works in the real world. Now, with 18 candidates at the outset, you can understand why every news organization wasn't running a three-part series on the records of Mike Gravel and Tom Tancredo. But we do narrow our focus way too early to a handful of perceived front-runners. When a candidate gets hot, the pendulum swings the other way, and lots of investigative reporters descend on his or her home state and start turning over rocks.

_______________________

Alexandria, Va.: On your interview with Claire Shipman and the Terminator: Can you acknowledge that the media's initial reporting from the wildfires started with a Katrina narrative -- and thus, that everything in the government response wasn't good enough? Arnold's plea that it wasn't all bad news certainly seemed to be underscored by the fires being tamed. Reporters don't look to everyone like Tribunes of the People. To Republican politicians, they often seem like an occupational hazard. To Republican voters, Shipman is coming from the boat of Stephanopoulos and Cuomo. They look like opposition researchers, like the Macaca kid.

Howard Kurtz: ABC's Claire Shipman was asking the governor a perfectly legitimate question: What about criticism from officials in Orange County that the state hadn't taken steps that had been recommended in the past to speed the response to these annual wildfires? In fact the Los Angeles Times had a big piece on this yesterday. As a bit of political theater, Schwarzenegger grabbed both of her hands and said there was only good news to report, even though she hated that. And in fact, California handled the disaster reasonably well. But I don't think reporters should be taking the view that everything is so perfect there is no reason to ask a governor about criticism by local officials.

_______________________

Mount Rainier, Md. -- following up: You sited the Williams and Ryan cases as attempts by the administration to "fake" news and columns before this latest FEMA incident. Did anyone in government get fired for those incidents? If not, why should we expect anyone to get fired over this, Secretary Chertoff's pronouncements not withstanding? And thanks for the honest chat!

Howard Kurtz: I don't recall anyone in the government getting fired over those earlier incidents. And it will be interesting to see whether Michael Chertoff, who professed to be outraged by the FEMA stunt, dismisses or disciplines anyone.

_______________________

Longmont, Colo.: Can we do away with the headlines like "Obama lashes out at Clinton" or "Dean lashes out at GOP on child health care"? To me, the word "lashes" connotes someone who is desperate and perhaps a little crazy, and is almost an insult.

Howard Kurtz: How about Rips? Slams? Attacks? Denounces? Whacks? We can be pretty creative around here.

_______________________

Anonymous: "There was an AP article that referred to Qualcomm Stadium as 'civil' during the San Diego Fires compared to the Superdome during Katrina." But when it was all done, wasn't the Superdome "civil"? All the early news reports turned out to be false, right? All we got was a very small "oops" from the press.

Howard Kurtz: The Superdome was a hellhole, with tired, hungry people receiving little to no help and the roof leaking. There were a couple of erroneous reports -- in one case spread by the mayor -- of violence within the stadium, and the media deserve to be criticized for that. But by and large the picture was accurate. Brian Williams was inside and reported on this with great passion.

_______________________

Baton Rouge, La.: "Now, with 18 candidates at the outset, you can understand why every news organization wasn't running a three-part series on the records of Mike Gravel and Tom Tancredo." Why not? CNN, FOX News, MSNBC all have 24 hours to fill every day, and most of it is garbage. Why not spend some time on in-depth profiles and do something to actually inform the public? Isn't that the mission of the media, to inform the public?

Howard Kurtz: Again, I'm not arguing the point. It would be nice to see more substantive reporting about more candidates. Cable executives, of course, fear that people would click away to other channels, whether they were doing Britney stories or anything else deemed sexier. They would argue that it's been a very long campaign and people are just starting to tune in now, so we should hold them accountable for what they do or don't do in their coverage.

That Project for Excellence in Journalism report, by the way, found that Jim Lehrer's NewsHour did less on the campaign than the networks, but spread the attention more evenly among all the candidates, not just Hillary, Obama, Rudy and Romney.

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.