Essay: Eliot Spitzer – A Man Without A Party

Photo of Seton Motley.
By Seton Motley | March 12, 2008 - 13:04 ET

Democrats dialing for damsels don't get labeled with the big "D"

NewsBusters.org | Media Research Center
Changing His Mind
Ronald Reagan often said "I did not leave the Democratic Party, the Democratic Party left me."

For floundering and foundering New York Governor Eliot Spitzer -- a twist on the Gipper's words. Spitzer didn't leave the Democratic Party: the Media just didn't see the need to mention the fact that Spitzer was - at least until noon Wednesday -- one of the most powerful Democrats in the nation.

On Monday afternoon, the Big Three Networks (NBC, ABC and CBS) and the Associated Press led the charge of the wall-to-wall coverage of the breaking news that Spitzer was involved with an interstate prostitution ring. And with near unanimity they failed to mention that Spitzer is a Democrat.

Spitzer - who since his years as the Big Apple's swashbuckling anti-capitalist Attorney General the Press has glowingly called the Champion of the Everyman -- was caught on one or more wiretaps dialing for damsels to the tune of $5,500 an hour.

Only the press can fail to see the irony of calling someone who inherited $500 million - and who hires ladies of the evening at hourly rates equal to a semester's tuition at a state university - a champion of the everyman.

Story Continues Below Ad ↓

Ronald Reagan also said, "It has been said that politics is the second oldest profession. I have learned that it bears a striking resemblance to the first." Spitzer has finally, formally joined the two in the latest installment of the late New York Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan's on-going game show "Defining Deviancy Down."

This is devolving into the network news equivalent of the Gong Show, where one utterly miserable contestant takes some sort of perverse pride in being gonged six seconds later than another utterly miserable contestant.

The media, as expected, inundated us with Spitzer stories. They went on and on at great length analyzing the merest minutiae and every detail related to the Spitzer saga - save one. Nearly all their reports were bereft of any mention that he is a (shhh!) Democrat.

NBC has been the worst offender. They have not -- as of early Wednesday morning -- yet labeled Spitzer as a Democrat in any manner.

They led off their Monday Nightly News cast with "Fall From Grace", a four minute story on Spitzer that made no mention -in either word or graphic - of the fact that he is a Democrat. Tuesday morning on their Today show they ran eleven Spitzer stories - in none of them did they label him a Democrat in any way. Tuesday's evening news again made no mention of Spitzer's Party affiliation, but somehow managed to verbally and graphically identify Republicans in their story on Spitzer.

That is thirteen NBC stories on Spitzer over nearly two full days, with no reference whatsoever to him as a Democrat.

ABC fared just barely better. Through Tuesday night, no one on either World News Tonight or Good Morning America said the word "Democrat" in reference to Spitzer. Two times for a total of six seconds -- once on Monday night and once on Tuesday morning -- a "D" was placed by his name in an on-screen graphic.

Like NBC, they too identified Republicans in their Spitzer stories as Republicans, and managed the added coup of assailing the Rs as partisan for wanting the apparently unaffiliated Spitzer to resign.

Congratulations ABC, for being six seconds more credible than NBC.

This is devolving into the network news equivalent of the Gong Show, where one utterly miserable contestant takes some sort of perverse pride in being gonged six seconds later than another utterly miserable contestant.

Hurrahs to CBS's Katie Couric, who on her Evening News actually called Spitzer a Democrat once. But the glory soon faded, as no one on Tuesday morning's Early Show did, relying on two spots totaling fourteen seconds worth of graphically delivered "D"s, and diminished further still with Tuesday night's news also failing to deliver the label.

Gong!

Our old friend, the Associated Press, broke the story with 590 words Monday afternoon, without any Spitzer Party mention. They then came back with a "BREAKING NEWS UPDATE" - perhaps it had come to their attention that he is in fact a Democrat? Alas, no. Eighty-six additional words, nary a "Democrat" amongst them.

Another, related question also remains unanswered -- of what Party affiliation is Customer #9 (Spitzer's Emperor Club call-sign)'s favorite girl, Kristen? The Media may very well deliver this before they do Spitzer's party.

And this is by no means the first time that a Democrat in hot water is transformed by the Media as if by magic into Unaffiliated Man.

Recall Gary Condit, the California DEMOCRATIC Congressman who in 2001 ran into trouble when his Capitol Hill intern and secret paramour Chandra Levy turned up missing and later dead? The Big Three Networks ran a total of 179 stories over the course of the saga -- only 14 contained a reference to him as a Democrat, less than 8%.

And current DEMOCRATIC Mayor of Detroit Kwame Kilpatrick - embroiled in a sex scandal involving his chief-of-staff - has been repeatedly delivered to the public as Unaffiliated Man by Media outlets great and small since the story broke in January.

Just more episodes in the never-ending Gong Show - Media series. (The real) Gong Show host Chuck Barris, somewhere, is smiling.

—Seton Motley is Director of Communications for the Media Research Center.

Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

"dialing for damsels" LOL!

"dialing for damsels"

LOL!

Thank you, Sir.

Seton Motley
Director of Communications
Media Research Center

not only is it the party

not only is it the party affiliation blackout that is maddening, it's the sympathetic framing of the story - whereas Republican scandals get the opposite

I also love the Alan

I also love the Alan Dershowitz defense that the outing of Spitzer is the real crime. That's really more than hilarious.

Yes, "the Party"

Didn't Rush Lumbaugh suggest that Senator Larry Craig (R) switch parties..., they he'd just be Senator Larry Craig.....,

 so, Elliott Spitzer could then become Elliot Spitzer (R)

 

 

journalism

journalism schools crack me up, they just tell people to write about stuff that they know nothing about

and they preach ethics ethics ethics . . .

one other thing...

I haven't caught every statement from Gov. Spitzer (d), but in the ones I have seen he constantly refers to this scandal as a private matter. A matter for him and his family. He's sorry to have let down his wife and family...etc. Have I missed the part where he admits to violating the laws of NY and his oath of office?

»→ No bluefeet

I didn't hear him say, "I'm sorry for facilitating the transportation of whores across state lines, in violation of Federal law which I am sworn to uphold,  for purposes of having elicit sex with them"

If it were truly a private matter, he could have apologized to his wife privately rather than drag her dazed countenance in front of National TV as a show of support for him. 

♣ a seal

Hmmm

In thinking on it some more, I bet the legal side of this situation is keeping him from admitting that he's broken the law. Granted a press conference isn't given under oath, but he probably doesn't want to taint a jury any more than it already will be.

My wife would be happy to stand behind me at the podium- it would put her in an excellent position to castrate me on live TV.

an affair could possibly be

an affair could possibly be a private matter, but prostitution is against the FEAKIN LAW MAN!!!!!!!!!!!!

I love it, this is as private as larry craig's foot tapping

Seton. Love the summary..

Seton. I love the summary.. would be really nice to see one of those graphic summaries of this by the end of this saga.

How's the print media doing? I noticed in the LA Times that some stories missed the "D" label entirely. One had the label Republican in the bi-line (calling for his resignation) but never identified Spitzer as a "D."

By and larger it's the captions below the pictures in both the print media and on the TV that seems to tell the tale.

Eliot Spitzer, with his wife, announces his resignation.

Just where is that "D?"

(;~> gary

I think they're doing it

I think they're doing it now just to spite NewsBusters...

I had to smile at that, Bal.

I had to smile at that despite efforts on my part not to, Bal. :-)

I understand the objection

I understand the objection to the initial omission, but at this point, does anyone need to be told that Spitzer's a democrat?

Yes. Once every story.

With a simple "(D. NY)." Early on in the story, the very first time they want to identify the politician. And I can't make promises on behalf of the rest of NewsBusters, but if the media did that and did it consistently as a matter for the style books, I'd be on your side instead of the conservatives' side, IF they were still complaining about it. But would they? Could they?
JMR

A corruption-story the TV media will-not cover.

Even if all media outlets

Even if all media outlets tried their best to be completely impartial (according to the definitions given by those who feel slighted), this site still wouldn't be happy. They'd still find SOMETHING.

And I think it's impossible for any media to be completely neutral.

I agree it's impossible to be neutral

But I think a simple, abbreviated identification convention and standard would help both journalists and their readers. Would NB cease to exist if I'd gotten my "(D. NY)" way a week ago? No, and there'd certainly be posts regarding Client #9. But not NEARLY this-many posts about such easy to fix bias!!
JMR

A corruption-story the TV media will-not cover.

True, but

And I think it's impossible for any media to be completely neutral.

True, but they can at least put forth an effort or try to make it LOOK like they are impartial. Did you ever hear Larry Craig's name without the word Republican in front of it? Did you ever see his name in print without the (R) behind it? Doubtful. I guess it's OK when "pundits" do it. Rush Limbaugh, for example may stress Democrat Governor of NY, but it's really no place for the actual press to intentionally treat one party any different than the other. Trust me, it is no accident that they do.

Fact is that they SHOULD mention party affiliation with every scandal, regardless if of whatever that party may be. Right now, they are only halfway there!

 



"To send men to the firing squad, judicial proof is unnecessary." Ernesto "Che" Guevara


people who read this site

people who read this site obviously know he is a D rather than a R, but there is a factory worker somewhere who does not have the resources others do and is unaware of his party affiliation . . .

 

That's baloney.

That's baloney.

Don't underestimate ignorance...

Some people, including everyone here, are "into" politics & news. Many others simply aren't. I know a guy who really does need to be told obvious things about politics, but he knows all sorts of things about college & professional sports because that's what he likes. 
JMR

A corruption-story the TV media will-not cover.

And that's arrogant.

I can name lots of people I know who only get their news from the old media. And I'll bet none of the ones I'm thinking of could tell you what party Spitzer belongs to, based on the reporting of this scandal.

There ARE still people out there who don't blog, balboa.

I should have clarified. It

I should have clarified. It sounded like "Here's this factory worker who because of his station in life doesn't have access to the same material we do."

If this factory worker really wants to find out Spitzer's party affiliation, he can find out really easily.

But you're (once again)

But you're (once again) missing the point, bal. This is a site about MEDIA BIAS. Did your "factory worker" (which I am, btw, and it still sounds condescending; how about "person?") need to "find out" independently about Mark Foley's affiliation? Or Larry Craig's?

No, he didn't. It was right up there on the screen, or in the copy: "Republican Congressman Mark Foley...." Same thing in the print media. They lead with it.

Why not this time? Why the avoidance? 

You know why. Quit playing coy, bal.

IJ

"Factory worker" was not my phrase. Seanp introduced it.

I've actually posted on why I think the (R) / (D) discrepancy exists.

I understand the

I understand the objection to the initial omission, but at this point, does anyone need to be told that Spitzer's a democrat?

Yes! Yes they do. You have to understand that the VAST majority of Americans do not read NewsBusters, watch Fox News or in any other way stay informed. Some might watch their local evening news or read the headlines as they pass the paper stand, neither of which tells his party affiliation. The rest get their news from The View or Letterman, neither of which is accurate nor will list his party.

 

I think it would be safe to bet that over 50% of Americans still have no idea who Spitzer is and that 50% of those that do have no idea what party he belongs to.

 

 



"To send men to the firing squad, judicial proof is unnecessary." Ernesto "Che" Guevara


ArcherB...You are so

ArcherB...

You are so right, most people do not even know who their own Senator, Gov. or congress-critters are...let alone their party, half of these critters even vote, which is spookier too.

Bal, that makes no sense to me.

It would be like deliberately losing lots of chips to "spite" an opponent in poker. These "chips" are media credibility, and an incident like this where "professional" journalists are once again too-lazy or too-biased to type a simple "(D. NY)" loses credibility for the MSM. It also gets Brent Bozell & other conservatives TV time talking about what looks to most folks like rather-obvious partisan bias. How in the world is that a good thing for the left, or spiteful to groups in the business of busting bias???
JMR

A corruption-story the TV media will-not cover.

Yyyeah...I wasn't serious.

Yyyeah...I wasn't serious.

Oh. Sorry.

I guess I'm becoming humor-impaired, as what looks to me like a simple-to-solve problem slowly takes over the blog. I would hope any journalist types reading this would, for the sake of all that is good, consider a small change in how they do things.
JMR

A corruption-story the TV media will-not cover.

It IS "simple to solve,"

It IS "simple to solve," sarc. But not by us. WE can't solve it, all we can do is illuminate it and hope for the best.

This is actually getting worse. There's nothing subtle about the bias anymore, the kid gloves are off. 

I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for that "small change," were I you.

Eliot...phone home

"Spitzer - who since his years as the Big Apple's swashbuckling
anti-capitalist Attorney General the Press has glowingly called the
Champion of the Everyman
..."

I wonder if criminal charges will follow. As the AG it would seem that he may have had a conflict of interest with certain elements of prostitution.

If conservatives are RIGHT, then liberals must be WRONG.

LK.... I just wonder how

LK....

I just wonder how big this will get, if there is more to this, I just heard a bit ago on Rush that the Duke of Westminster is client #6 or some such and is on the front pages of one of the London papers....

I know what I heard on msnbc, they are wanting to put this to bed and end the discussion on this, if this was a repub in the exact same situation you could be sure the digging by the msm would be very deep already on all of Spritzer's faults, going way back I would imagine...who knows what all this entails internationally too.

Time will tell, but the leftist msm press most likely will pretend this is a story that is no longer a story now...can't we just move along now...and they wonder why they are so despised.

BT...

Whether the MSM follows it or not is a different issue. I am thinking that Federal charges of some sort could be brought against him.

[ Maybe just in time for the election ]

If conservatives are RIGHT, then liberals must be WRONG.

LK... Well I assumed you

LK...

Well I assumed you knew that I was agreeing with you ...lol.

That's what I get for assuming.

So far the only federal charge I have heard that may be thrown at him is the MANN ACT...which I heard can be as much as 5 years of so....what I meant too was there may be more than we know about all of this.

My thoughts, too, BT. This

My thoughts, too, BT. This happened in Washington, right? I'm sure no one there ever employs prostitutes.

</sarcasm>

My wife...

Many of us question where our wife would be if we were in Spitzer's shorts 'er shoes. My wife posited that as a good attorney (Harvard grad and all) she asked her husband "what's standing beside you worth?" Oh sure, she would get a big payday if a divorce occurs, but this would be a "little extra something something" to go with it -- say $100M?

Spitzer resigning was good call

IMO if a man goes out to see a prostitute it does not bother me at all. It has nothing to do with how well a person doe his job.

One thing that really bugs me about republicans when they are caught in a straight or gay sex scandal is there is such hypocricy. The person in question usually is preaching abstinence only, anti gay remarks.

In this case Spitzer often went after prostitution rings with a gusto and this hypocrisy label definitely applies to him as well. So good riddance Spitzer.

America's sweetheart does gangsta rap

Where is Sharpton's outrage?

I'm waiting for Al Sharpton to get involved in this.

'Why did Eliot Spitzer pick only white women to be his whores? What is he implying, that black women aren't good enough to pay $5000 an hour? Where's the justice? '

Label the broadcasters

Since broadcasters are so seldom objective, I would like to see them introduced with a D or R behind their name.  This would also show how few of them would have an R.  I would also apply this standard to all other journalists, in the interest of full disclosure.

No, it's just that with his

No, it's just that with his looks, it probably took $5K for the girls to consent.

Spitzer v. Vitter

I am not trying to defned Vitter, but in the comparison between Spitzer and Vitter it should be pointed out that Vitter's transgressions allegedly occurred between 1999 & 2001, when he was a Congressman. They were made public in 2007.

Spitzer's alleged transgression took place less than one month ago.

I'll bet

these high paid ho's are REPUBLICAN!