CBS This Morning co-host Harry Smith offered a typically sappy and supportive Bill Clinton interview in the 7:30 half hour on Monday. Our Kyle Drennen will have more on that later today. But bias aside, can we just suggest that viewers should expect a news anchor who does his homework? In reporting on Andrew Young's remarks that Clinton is as black as Barack Obama, Smith called him "your UN ambassador," and Clinton had to correct him: he was a UN ambassador for Jimmy Carter.
Then Smith turned to Clinton saying he always opposed the Gulf War. He said "I did a little Googling," and found that all Clinton said was we should let the inspectors do their work. Harry Smith has the resources and the tape library and the high-faluting Tiffany Network traditions of CBS News -- and he's Googling by the seat of his pants at 4 in the morning? He should have found what ABC's Jake Tapper found, and he could it have Googled it from NewsBusters:
BILL CLINTON [File footage from GMA on September 27, 2002]: This guy is-- He's got a very dangerous program. We need to eliminate it.
TAPPER: On his own foundation's website, a 2003 speech where Clinton said, quote, "I supported the President when he asked the Congress for authority to stand up against weapons of mass destruction in Iraq." All of this refocuses attention where his wife does not want it, on her 2002 vote to authorize the President to go to war.
There are many reasons CBS is third in the morning. One big, blabby, sloppy reason is Harry Smith.
—Tim Graham is Director of Media Analysis at the Media Research Center
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
I'll bet dollars to donuts
December 10, 2007 - 09:21 ET by motherbeltI'll bet dollars to donuts Smith said Young's comment was that Clinton was as "black" as Obama, instead of what he actually said: namely that Clinon had gone out with more black women than Obama.
My guess would be: just another "cleaning up" of a quote to make it more palatable.
The Quote
December 10, 2007 - 09:23 ET by allanfYou win!!! The quote is:
Nope...Young said it
December 10, 2007 - 09:28 ET by Tim GrahamThey showed the clip earlier on the CBS show.
Maybe so, but that was
December 10, 2007 - 10:40 ET by motherbeltMaybe so, but that was "earlier." What did he say to Clinton during the interview?
I know I'm being picky, but I'm betting that Smith would not bring up the "women" thing when talking to the former Prez.
normal
December 10, 2007 - 10:53 ET by audio357stuff from the msm.. my main man bill is the best used car salesman i have ever seen. they seem to worship the folks who are great liars and swindlers.. somehow that gets respect from these folks.. i dont get it.
honesty is the best policy... unless your running for office.
And I'll bet he also left
December 10, 2007 - 14:11 ET by motherbeltAnd I'll bet he also left out the fact that Young said blacks should vote for HRC because she has a "support system" including her husband. IOW, vote for Hillary to bring back Bill.
And one more thing on the Clinton and black women thing: I just heard a caller to Rush with and excellent point:
Young makes a joke about Clinton and black women, and everyone goes HAHAHAHA. Does anyone remember the outrage when a campaign ad had a babe saying "Call me" to the black Harold Ford, and she happened to be white? Her color wasn't even the point, but people took it that way.
The next caller to Rush was a black man, outraged by the fact that not only did those black people not object to Young's implication that Clinton used black women as a "dalliance" but they seemed to be proud of the fact that he would do so. He was insulted on behalf of black women by the implication that they would mess around with a married man just because it was Bill Clinton.
Of course, it was all a joke, as Young said, but why the huge difference?
A lot of media bias comes
December 10, 2007 - 10:57 ET by KC MulvilleA lot of media bias comes from “framing the issue,” done in so many ways. To give a complementary example, consider Tim Russert’s interview with Rudy Giuliani. Overall, I didn’t think Russert did a bad job, but he did one thing that annoyed the hell out of me.
He asked Rudy about the NIE report, and Rudy began his answer by pointing out that the report argued for more pressure on Iran, because that was what worked.
Russert couldn’t help himself from trying to frame the issue. At that point, he interrupted Rudy and corrected, “diplomatic pressure,” implying that the military invasion had nothing to do with Iran’s stopping its weapons program. (Right. As if that magnificent invasion force next door really didn't enter into Iran's decision ... who's kidding who?)
Rudy blocked that liberal myth immediately, by arguing that you can’t separate the military from the diplomatic.
It was clear that Russert was trying to frame the report on Democrat terms, implying that warmongering conservatives would rather shoot enemies instead of talking with them. But Rudy correctly answered that foreign policy isn’t either-or; reward and punishment have to go hand in hand. The media frames every question, and they do it every time. Harry Smith is just clumsy at it.
They do it in so many ways
December 10, 2007 - 12:19 ET by motherbeltThey do it in so many ways it's not even funny. Or subtle. Your example, for instance, or the bias of what they don't report.
The example of the difference that I especially hate is that they will bring up a "scandal" and challenge a Republican to refute it. But for a Democrat they will use the "your opponents say..." and then say something like "is that a legitimate issue?" or "do you think people care about that?" opening the door for the Dem to assail the "politics of personal destruction" or do the "let's talk about the issues that matter" number.
That's a good observation,
December 10, 2007 - 14:08 ET by JohnMThat's a good observation, MB - it is subtle, and I don't think I've ever really picked up on it so clearly. I'm adding it to my list of bias tactics to watch out for.
Tim. Clinton's impassioned support of Iraq war.
December 10, 2007 - 12:18 ET by Gary HallTim, Clinton did not simply just support the war. On Larry King Live, July 22, 2003, he made a impassioned plea to the country - that we all get together and stand behind the effort in Iraq (and to stop the crap with the media drama over the yellow cake issue). Had the media not squashed his view on Iraq -- his plea might have resulted in the country coming together on a number of issues surrounding the Iraq war.
Perhaps the terrorists and disenchanted in Iraq might have looked out and seen that the US was serious in it's effort to bring peace and some form of democracy and basic rights for all, and Iraq might not have sunk into the horrible mess that confronted them and us all. But the media had no interest in anything other than destroying the Bush administration - so they kept it out of the national view. Larry King is asking about the yellow cake issue - to become the Wilson/Plame/Libby affair -- and not only does Clinton defend the Bush administration on the issue, he keeps changing the subject to remind us all that the WMD's were in Iraq -- and he keeps interjecting how important it is that we all support the effort in Iraq.; excerpts (my bold [my comments] - sorry about the length):
For a media that always likes Bill Clinton's advice -- how'd they do with censoring this view? One that might have actually brought the country together. I think we would have long ago pulled off the Iraq experience - successfully?(;~/
Great post, Gary! How
December 10, 2007 - 14:02 ET by motherbeltGreat post, Gary! How quickly they forget.
The Clintons operate by the "that explanation is no longer operative" principle.
And usually start off by saying "I've always said.." or "I've always supported (or opposed)....." and no one ever calls them on it ans says "no you haven't."
That's why they continue to get away with what they do.
For example: How many times
December 10, 2007 - 14:12 ET by JohnMFor example: How many times between 2001 and 2006 did HRC say she absolutely wouldn't be running for Pres in 2008?
motherbelt
December 10, 2007 - 14:40 ET by Gary HallThanks. And, it's not limited to the Clinton's - this media mental lapse. gary
With "Charlie Wilson's War" coming to the big screen soon -- just when can we envision anyone in the MSM asking Jimmy Carter, "So, you, Brzezinski, and Wilson were all covertly suppling arms to the anti-Soviet forces in Afghanistan - and you, as President, actually personally warned Soviet Premier Brezhnev that the US would consider a nuclear strike on the USSR if they went one step past Afghanistan, i.e., Pakistan, in their Imperialist march for a warm water port?"
In the synopsis of the movie, Charlie Wilson's War, it boldly states:
In Hollywood's view - Ronald Reagan did little to bring down the USSR, but now this Democrat from Texas did?
Sickening
December 10, 2007 - 13:07 ET by JimboI saw the teaser for this this morning. I turned it off as soon as I heard Harry Smith (grinning ear to ear) refer to Bubba who was sitting across from him as "President Clinton". This coming from the MSM who continually refer to the sitting President as "Mr. Bush" on a good day, and simply as "Bush" on most days.
Sickening.
Leon says "By the way, I'm not afraid of fat people, I'm repulsed"
Truth Monger Says - "Both are religions [Christianity & Islam], yes - with the same percentage of terrorists."