top
|
|
1. CBS Showcases Republicans Upset by 'Ugly and Nasty' McCain In a Tuesday night look at the battle for Pennsylvania, the CBS Evening News chose to check how, anchor Katie Couric reported, voters in the Keystone state "are doing some last-minute soul-searching." The story showcased husband and wife "registered Republicans" who are upset by what reporter Jeff Glor characterized as McCain's "overwhelmingly negative" TV ads. The husband, who conceded he'll be voting for Obama, declared: "I just don't think it's necessary to be that ugly and that nasty against the opponent." His wife concurred: "I think it actually hurts their cause rather than helps it when they're negative like that. At least for me it does." She described herself as "in the middle, but I'm leaning slightly towards McCain." 2. NBC's Ron Mott Boasts Texas 'Surprisingly Competitive' for Obama! Well the media have officially gotten cocky when they start predicting that the reddest of red states could be in play for Barack Obama, and that's precisely what NBC's Ron Mott did on Tuesday's Today show, when he cheered that Texas "may be surprisingly competitive." In a report on early voting, Mott noted the long lines for those willing to participate in early voting and celebrated: "So far Democratic voters appear to be the ones most willing to wait, and that could spell good news for Senator Barack Obama who's encouraged supporters, including his legion of newly registered young voters, to take advantage of early voting in 32 states and they've answered the call." 3. CBS: McCain Still Attacking Obama, Palin Still 'Drag' on Ticket At the top of Tuesday's CBS Early Show, correspondent Jeff Glor portrayed Barack Obama as the victim of John McCain's attacks: "Meanwhile, the campaigns were making their closing arguments, with special emphasis on the arguing part...John McCain backers have launched an array of new attacks on Barack Obama, including more robocalls." Glor then skipped over any of Obama's robocalls and instead declared: "The Obama campaign's relentless responses come quickly." Glor then played a clip of the "response": "John McCain wants to tear Barack Obama down, with scare tactics and smears." Following Glor's report, co-host Maggie Rodriguez discussed the candidates' chances in Pennsylvania with former Republican Governor Tom Ridge and current Democratic Governor Ed Rendell. Rodriguez began by asking Ridge: "Last week you said that you thought that McCain would be faring much better in your state had he chosen you as a running mate. Sarah Palin certainly is trying really hard, she's been there 11 times, four more times today. Do you think she's been a drag on the ticket in your state?" 4. NPR Ignores Obama's 2001 Interview with Chicago Public Radio Although the audio that emerged of Sen. Barack Obama lamenting the lack of "redistributive change" came from an interview he did with Chicago Public Radio, National Public Radio's Morning Edition and All Things Considered on Monday as well as Morning Edition on Tuesday completely ignored the audiotape of Obama's 2001 interview. 5. Washington Week Panel Offers Double Standard on Biden vs. Palin Jeanne Cummings, a former political reporter for the Wall Street Journal who now works at the Politico, displayed an obvious double standard in her appearance on Friday night's Washington Week show on PBS. Joe Biden's prediction that a President Obama would be tested quickly with an international crisis was worth dismissing, since it came so late in the campaign, after Obama had already convinced many voters he was a capable leader. But the RNC buying "pricey togs" for Sarah Palin was a political disaster that completely undermined her just-folks appeal. It showed "a huge disconnect. And it has the risk of robbing her of the real strength that she had brought to the campaign." 6. Editor of Time on Fawning Obama Coverage: Media Will Regret This Editor at large of Time magazine Mark Halperin, the former political director for ABC News who now runs Time's "The Page" blog, appeared on Tuesday's edition of MSNBC's Morning Joe and admitted "mistakes have been made" in regard to the media's coverage of Barack Obama and that "people will regret it." Analyzing the fawning press that the Democratic presidential candidate has received, he added: "If Obama wins and goes on to become a hugely successful President, I think, still, people will look back and say it just wasn't done the right way." Joe Scarborough, host of Morning Joe, prompted the brief discussion when he opened the MSNBC program by declaring: "But I got to say this, the media, the media has been really, really biased this campaign, I think." He then asked Halperin if journalists are "just in love with history?" Halperin candidly responded: "History and the story is just- it's great for us. It's been great for us. He's a great story." He then went on to make his "mistakes have been made" quip, prompting Scarborough to burst out laughing. 7. Politico: No Bias, But 80% of Journalists Will Vote for Obama John F. Harris and Jim VandeHei were important players on the Washington Post's political team when they left to start The Politico newspaper and Web site. But they don't think that most "mainstream" reporters are liberals or partisans. Now they've written an article provocatively titled "Why McCain Is Getting Hosed by the Press," noting their own mothers think the media's in the tank for Obama. Harris and VandeHei declared: "OK, let's just get this over with: Yes, in the closing weeks of this election, John McCain and Sarah Palin are getting hosed in the press, and at Politico." But to critics, they can only say: "Our sincere answer is that of the factors driving coverage of this election -- and making it less enjoyable for McCain to read his daily clip file than for Obama -- ideological favoritism ranks virtually nil." Yet they made the "educated guess" that "Obama will win the votes of probably 80 percent or more of journalists covering the 2008 election."
and Nasty' McCain In a Tuesday night look at the battle for Pennsylvania, the CBS Evening News chose to check how, anchor Katie Couric reported, voters in the Keystone state "are doing some last-minute soul-searching." The story showcased husband and wife "registered Republicans" who are upset by what reporter Jeff Glor characterized as McCain's "overwhelmingly negative" TV ads. The husband, who conceded he'll be voting for Obama, declared: "I just don't think it's necessary to be that ugly and that nasty against the opponent." His wife concurred: "I think it actually hurts their cause rather than helps it when they're negative like that. At least for me it does." She described herself as "in the middle, but I'm leaning slightly towards McCain." Glor began with how the Allentown-area couple, "Rick, 50, and Jane, 45, are registered Republicans, though Rick especially believes he has reason to cross party lines." He explained: "In 2006 and again just this year, I've been laid off from two different jobs, and I look at it, and it's all happened under the current party." [This item, by the MRC's Brent Baker, was posted Tuesday night on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters.org: newsbusters.org ] The MRC's Brad Wilmouth corrected the closed-captioning against the video to provide this transcript of the story on the Tuesday, October 28 CBS Evening News: KATIE COURIC: It's precisely because Virginia is becoming friendlier to the Democrats that Senator McCain, as Dean [Reynolds] just mentioned, is so desperate to win Pennsylvania. The latest poll there shows him trailing Senator Obama by nine points [50-41]. But as Jeff Glor reports, voters are doing some last-minute soul-searching in that battleground state.
JEFF GLOR: It's game night inside the Kline household near Allentown, but picking a President this year is the real contest.
Competitive' for Obama! Well the media have officially gotten cocky when they start predicting that the reddest of red states could be in play for Barack Obama, and that's precisely what NBC's Ron Mott did on Tuesday's Today show, when he cheered that Texas "may be surprisingly competitive." In a report on early voting, Mott noted the long lines for those willing to participate in early voting and celebrated: "So far Democratic voters appear to be the ones most willing to wait, and that could spell good news for Senator Barack Obama who's encouraged supporters, including his legion of newly registered young voters, to take advantage of early voting in 32 states and they've answered the call." Then a little later, before throwing it back to Today anchor Meredith Vieira, Mott concluded the story with this overly confident observation: "Polls here in Texas give Senator McCain a relatively comfortable advantage but Democrats are nonetheless optimistic. They point to record turnout that we've seen so far, and a record number of registered voters, 13.5 million, as two signs perhaps that Texas may be surprisingly competitive this time next week. Meredith?" [This item, by the MRC's Geoffrey Dickens, was posted Tuesday morning, on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters.org: newsbusters.org ] The following is the full story as it was aired on the October 28 Today show:
MEREDITH VIEIRA: While Election Day is seven days away millions of Americans have cast their ballots already in the states where you are allowed to vote early, but since this election is drawing so much interest even early voters are being forced to hurry up and wait. NBC's Ron Mott is at a polling station in San Antonio, Texas with more. Ron, good morning.
Still 'Drag' on Ticket At the top of Tuesday's CBS Early Show, correspondent Jeff Glor portrayed Barack Obama as the victim of John McCain's attacks: "Meanwhile, the campaigns were making their closing arguments, with special emphasis on the arguing part...John McCain backers have launched an array of new attacks on Barack Obama, including more robocalls." Glor then skipped over any of Obama's robocalls and instead declared: "The Obama campaign's relentless responses come quickly." Glor then played a clip of the "response": "John McCain wants to tear Barack Obama down, with scare tactics and smears." Following Glor's report, co-host Maggie Rodriguez discussed the candidates' chances in Pennsylvania with former Republican Governor Tom Ridge and current Democratic Governor Ed Rendell. Rodriguez began by asking Ridge: "Last week you said that you thought that McCain would be faring much better in your state had he chosen you as a running mate. Sarah Palin certainly is trying really hard, she's been there 11 times, four more times today. Do you think she's been a drag on the ticket in your state?" Ridge responded by correcting Rodriguez's mis-characterization of his comments: "Well, first of all, I said that Senator McCain chose a vice presidential candidate not to win one state, but someone who had appeal across the board in all fifty states. It would be like saying would Senator Obama be doing even better in Pennsylvania if he had Ed Rendell as a running mate, I suspect he would." [This item, by the MRC's Kyle Drennen, was posted Tuesday afternoon on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters.org: newsbusters.org ] In contrast, Rodriguez asked Rendell if Obama would be a victim of rascism: "...polls show in the state that Barack Obama has a commanding lead there. But there's been a lot of talk about race in this race, especially on election day. Do you believe that race was a factor when your friend Hillary Clinton won the primary there? And do you think it'll be a factor one week from today?" Meanwhile, the Early Show did not report on comments made by Pennsylvania Democratic Congressman John Murtha, who referred to western Pennsylvania voters as racist. Rodriguez turned back to Ridge and asked: "...yesterday Alaska Republican Senator Ted Stevens was convicted on corruption, do you think that this will at all effect the McCain-Palin race?" At the very end of the segment, Rendell picked up on Rodriguez's first question to Ridge, remarking: "And Tom Ridge should've been the vice presidential choice, he's too modest to say." Following Rodriguez's interview with Ridge and Rendell, she turned to correspondent Bill Plante, who reported on McCain's chances: "Now, most polls have John McCain down anywhere from 3 to 13 points, a week before election day. Now McCain has been counted out before and comeback, but can do it? What are his chances by next Tuesday?" Plante got analysis from American University professor James Thurber, who explained: "It's rare at this stage, 8 days out, that candidates will come from behind and win." While Thurber and Plante cited some recent historical examples of political comebacks, Plante concluded the segment by observing: "But this year, early voting means that the choices of millions of voters are already locked in." Thurber added: "If some event occurs in the next 8 days to help McCain, he may still lose, because a whole lot of people have already voted for Obama." Plante continued: "And there's another problem, there aren't that many undecided voters left, maybe 5%. So a McCain comeback is possible, but it would take a very large swing of already committed voters." Here is the full transcript of Glor's report and Rodriguez's interview:
7:00AM TEASE:
GLOR: The Obama campaign's relentless responses come quickly.
[CLIP OF OBAMA AD] GLOR: But while the two men's messages do not cover the same ground, their feet do.
OBAMA: Pittsburgh I've got two words for you, one week.
RODRIGUEZ: CBS's Jeff Glor, thank you, Jeff. It's time now for a little 'R & R' as in Ridge and Rendell, two men hard at work trying to deliver Pennsylvania to their candidates. In Hershey, campaigning with Senator McCain, is former Republican Governor Tom Ridge, and in Philadelphia, current Governor Ed Rendell, a Democrat. Good morning, Governors.
Chicago Public Radio Although the audio that emerged of Sen. Barack Obama lamenting the lack of "redistributive change" came from an interview he did with Chicago Public Radio, National Public Radio's Morning Edition and All Things Considered on Monday as well as Morning Edition on Tuesday completely ignored the audiotape of Obama's 2001 interview. During his campaign stop in Dayton, Ohio, Sen. John McCain specifically addressed the recently surfaced audio and even quoted Obama as saying, "One of the tragedies of the civil rights movement was because the civil rights movement became so court-focused I think that there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalitions of power through which you bring about redistributive change." Nevertheless, during Monday's All Things Considered report on McCain's campaigning in Ohio, there was no mention of the audiotape or of McCain using Obama's own words against him. Instead, the broadcast focused on McCain's argument that one party ruling the country would be disastrous. [This item, by MRC intern Lyndsi Thomas, was posted Tuesday afternoon on the MRC's blog: newsbusters.org ] Tuesday's Morning Edition story on McCain's speeches from the previous day did include a clip of the Arizona senator in which in he said, "That's the problem with Senator Obama's approach to our economy. He's more interested in controlling wealth than creating it. In redistributing money instead of spreading opportunity. I'm going to create wealth for all Americans by creating opportunity for all Americans." However, reporter Scott Horsley framed this as McCain merely continuing to use Joe the Plumber's exchange with Obama rather than the audiotape from 2001. But, the Tuesday morning show did find the time to feature two newspaper cartoonists who joked about Sarah Palin's comments that you can see Russia from parts of Alaska and who also claimed that they, as cartoonists, were "dreading" Obama becoming president because he is difficult to mock, unlike our current president.
on Biden vs. Palin Jeanne Cummings, a former political reporter for the Wall Street Journal who now works at the Politico, displayed an obvious double standard in her appearance on Friday night's Washington Week show on PBS. Joe Biden's prediction that a President Obama would be tested quickly with an international crisis was worth dismissing, since it came so late in the campaign, after Obama had already convinced many voters he was a capable leader. But the RNC buying "pricey togs" for Sarah Palin was a political disaster that completely undermined her just-folks appeal. It showed "a huge disconnect. And it has the risk of robbing her of the real strength that she had brought to the campaign." [This item, by the MRC's Tim Graham, was posted Tuesday afternoon on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters.org: newsbusters.org ] There's a professional reason Cummings was so invested in the damage that story did: it was her story. But at what point does another journalist like Ifill ask: so, are you happy that you damaged her strength? Here's how the October 24 exchange happened:
CUMMINGS: It does seem like that Biden at some point was going to do this. He was going to go off message. For Cummings's story in The Politico on the thousands the RNC spent on Palin's clothes, see the October 22, 2008 item, "RNC shells out $150K for Palin fashion," go to: www.politico.com Ifill may have talked to Cummings before the show about how she just stumbled across this set of expenditures deep in a federal election report. But the viewer at home might suspect that the story was fed to her by the Democrats, which wouldn't take as much sleuthing. When Ifill started assessing the Biden gaffe -- and played a snippet on the air -- she went to Washington Post reporter Shailagh Murray to discuss it, and she also quickly dismissed its impact as something that "didn't really take hold."
IFILL: What was he trying to say, Shailagh, in that little comment he made? Former Time reporter John Dickerson (now with the liberal website Slate) also underlined how this is a big problem for Palin, that as she loved the song "Redneck Woman" and said "thank you" to being called one, her clothes show a real disconnect.
Media Will Regret This Editor at large of Time magazine Mark Halperin, the former political director for ABC News who now runs Time's "The Page" blog, appeared on Tuesday's edition of MSNBC's Morning Joe and admitted "mistakes have been made" in regard to the media's coverage of Barack Obama and that "people will regret it." Analyzing the fawning press that the Democratic presidential candidate has received, he added: "If Obama wins and goes on to become a hugely successful President, I think, still, people will look back and say it just wasn't done the right way." Joe Scarborough, host of Morning Joe, prompted the brief discussion when he opened the MSNBC program by declaring: "But I got to say this, the media, the media has been really, really biased this campaign, I think." He then asked Halperin if journalists are "just in love with history?" Halperin candidly responded: "History and the story is just- it's great for us. It's been great for us. He's a great story." He then went on to make his "mistakes have been made" quip, prompting Scarborough to burst out laughing. [This item, by the MRC's Scott Whitlock, was posted Tuesday afternoon on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters.org: newsbusters.org ] Scarborough then proceeded to vaguely describe the type of journalists who have gushed over Obama. Without naming names, or explaining if he was talking about a fellow MSNBC host, the former Republican congressman explained: JOE SCARBOROUGH: But there's certain white guys...that just barely missed the party in the civil rights movement. They're the late '50s, early to mid '60s. They wish they had been there with Brokaw, holding a, you know, being in Selma and all these other places. But they weren't. So, they seem to be the ones that are completely in the tank because they want to be a part of the history this time. They want- They want to help elect an African American president and they can put that on their, you know, bedpost. A transcript of the exchange, which occurred at 6:01am EDT on October 28, 2008:
JOE SCARBOROUGH: But I got to say this, the media, the media has been really, really biased this campaign, I think. But it's not been a Republican/Democratic bias. It's 6:01 and I'm jumping right in. But, actually, I'm starting to have this conversation with other members of the media, who say, you know what? We may be- This may end up like 2002, 2003, where we weren't as tough as we should have been. Some hand wringing. But this- Hillary Clinton's campaign also complained that there was a lot of bias shown against her. Is the media just in love with history here, Mark, do you think?
Will Vote for Obama John F. Harris and Jim VandeHei were important players on the Washington Post's political team when they left to start The Politico newspaper and Web site. But they don't think that most "mainstream" reporters are liberals or partisans. Now they've written an article provocatively titled "Why McCain Is Getting Hosed by the Press," noting their own mothers think the media's in the tank for Obama. Harris and VandeHei declared: "OK, let's just get this over with: Yes, in the closing weeks of this election, John McCain and Sarah Palin are getting hosed in the press, and at Politico." But to critics, they can only say: "Our sincere answer is that of the factors driving coverage of this election -- and making it less enjoyable for McCain to read his daily clip file than for Obama -- ideological favoritism ranks virtually nil." Yet they made the "educated guess" that "Obama will win the votes of probably 80 percent or more of journalists covering the 2008 election." [This item, by the MRC's Tim Graham, was posted Tuesday afternoon on the MRC's blog, NewsBusters.org: newsbusters.org ]
They proclaimed that reporters are far too professional to let their personality show: "The main reason is that for most journalists, professional obligations trump personal preferences. Most political reporters (investigative journalists tend to have a different psychological makeup) are temperamentally inclined to see multiple sides of a story, and being detached from their own opinions comes relatively easy." For more on Harris's "hanging on for dear life" remark about Palin after the vice presidential debate, see Tim Graham's October 3 NewsBusters item, "On PBS, Biden Toasted As 'Crisper,' Palin 'Hanging On for Dear Life,'" at: newsbusters.org For more on VandeHei's "what do you dislike most about America" question to Mitt Romney, see the May 4, 2007 CyberAlert item, "Question During Debate: 'What Do You Dislike Most About America?'" at: www.mrc.org Reporters are centrists, they claimed, although they'll overwhelmingly favor liberal Obama at the ballot box: "And, yes, based on a combined 35 years in the news business we'd take an educated guess -- nothing so scientific as a Pew study -- that Obama will win the votes of probably 80 percent or more of journalists covering the 2008 election. Most political journalists we know are centrists -- instinctually skeptical of ideological zealotry -- but with at least a mild liberal tilt to their thinking, particularly on social issues. So what?" Harris and VandeHei dragged out the hoary old claim that reporters are more obsessed about process and polls than making the world safe for liberalism, but then they devastate their own argument in looking at what's happened to McCain: One is McCain backlash. The Republican once was the best evidence of how little ideology matters. Even during his "maverick" days, McCain was a consistent social conservative, with views on abortion and other cultural issues that would have been odds with those of most reporters we know. Yet he won swooning coverage for a decade from reporters who liked his accessibility and iconoclasm and supposed commitment to clean politics. Now he is paying. McCain's decision to limit media access and align himself with the GOP conservative base was an entirely routine, strategic move for a presidential candidate. But much of the coverage has portrayed this as though it were an unconscionable sellout. Since then the media often presumes bad faith on McCain's part. The best evidence of this has been the intense focus on the negative nature of his ads, when it is clear Obama has been similarly negative in spots he airs on radio and in swing states. SUSPEND Excerpt How does this reaction in any way square with the notion that reporters don't care about ideology? Then the writers added that while they don't think reporters are rooting for Obama, they do think his race is an advantage, but not an ideological advantage: But he has benefited from the idea that negative attacks that in a normal campaign would be commonplace in this year would carry an out-of-bounds racial subtext. That's why Obama's long association with the Rev. Jeremiah Wright was basically a nonissue in the general election. Journalists' hair-trigger racial sensitivity may have been misplaced, but it was not driven by an ideological tilt. SUSPEND Excerpt This argument is just bizarre. Reverend Wright was not merely a racial figure. He was a rabidly ideological figure who charged in sermons that murdering 3,000 Americans on September 11 was just the "chickens coming home to roost" for American terrorism, and a figure making wild racial conspiracy theories like the U.S. government inventing the AIDS virus to kill off black people. Ignoring Wright does not show a "hair-trigger racial sensitivity." It shows that a liberal press corps doesn't want the concept of patriotism to be an issue. They think it is a phony issue, and they also think that if it was an issue, that McCain's sacrifice for his country dramatically outweighs Obama's. The most tiring argument is the "momentum bias" argument, that it's odd to expect the press to report that the McCain campaign is going great when the polls are all against it. But that argument neglects that the polls in some respects reflect months and months of pro-Obama bias. Reporters are expected to challenge both candidates, not simply the one who's behind, which the writers acknowledged: A couple weeks back, Politico managing editor Bill Nichols sent out a note to the campaign team urging people to cough up more story ideas that took a skeptical look at the campaign tactics and policy proposals of the Democrat, who is likely to be president three months from now. As it happened, the response was a trickle. END of Excerpts This doesn't sound like a staff full of reporters that are detached from their own liberal opinions. For the October 28 posting by Harris and VandeHei: www.politico.com
-- Brent Baker
Home | News Division
| Bozell Columns | CyberAlerts |
|
|
|