One of the nice things about having a television and newsletter archive at MRC is being able to bring up the old newscasts and recall how very different the tone and approach of the news was when a Democrat was in the White House. The U.S. Attorney-firing scandal is a strong example of how the network news can on one hand, sell a scandal as incredibly damaging for a political party it does not support, but downplays scandal as damaging to democracy and the people when it affects the political party it favors. Our latest Media Reality Check reminds readers of how different the news sounded ten years ago, when a Republican Congress investigated illegal foreign donations, mostly to national Democratic Party accounts. Take NBC:
NBC theorized that the media were too Clinton-scandal obsessed in 1997. On June 17, 1997, Today co-host Katie Couric asked reporter Bob Woodward: “But are members of the media, do you think, Bob, too scandal-obsessed, looking for something at every corner?”
On August 1, even as the Senate moved to subpoena the White House, co-host Matt Lauer professed: “But there aren't any major storm clouds on the horizon for Bill Clinton, other than maybe Medicare reform.” Newsweek's Jonathan Alter replied: “Yeah, but of course there are these possible scandals, but when the economy is doing well, the public really doesn't seem to care much about anything else.”
On October 8, Today co-host Katie Couric framed the hearings for Sen. Arlen Specter: “Perhaps this is an intentional effort to embarrass the Democratic Party?” On the November 7 Today, NBC's Lisa Myers pressed Senator Fred Thompson: “Your hearings clearly reinforced the public's already low opinion of politicians and politics. Beyond that, what did it accomplish?”
It's a little humorous to recall that the liberal media forecasted no "major storm clouds" for Bill Clinton just a few months before the Monica Lewinsky scandal broke wide open. In the Clinton years, liberal media critics (including those given hours on PBS to unspool their theories) indicted the media for producing "scandal and conflict over substance." But when the Republicans are in power, scandal is the substance that matters most. In most cases, no matter who's in power, scandal is a substantive story. But it can definitely be overblown (or undercooked) depending on who's manufacturing the "news."
—Tim Graham is Director of Media Analysis at the Media Research Center
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Yes, the whole tone is dif
March 25, 2007 - 15:09 ET by motherbeltYes, the whole tone is different now . Investigating the acceptance of campaign contributions from China back then was being "scandal obsessed" and something the public supposedly didn't care about. Now some US attorneys get fired, and according to the MSM, this is a "constitutional crisis." It's also a "story that's not going away" . And when they say, that, it's not a prediction, it's a promise.
stories
March 25, 2007 - 18:39 ET by tejanodiablogolly, i hate to say it but Bush doesn't seem to have the cojones of a miniature bunny wabbit .. why can't he come out and call a press conference blasting democrats and rino weasels for the liars, backstabbers and peckerwoods they really are .. he has less than two years to really do anything and instead of hanging back or inviting the kennedy clan over for movies and sweet tea he needs to start kicking butt and taking names .. if he wants to fire 8 prosecutors rather than 93, that's fine with me (they serve at his pleasure, after all) .. if he wants to turn tehran into a glass factory, that's fine, too ..
never look a gift skunk in the tail ..
Not just before Lewinsky, D
March 25, 2007 - 15:11 ET by sarcasmoNot just before Lewinsky, DURING Lippo IIRC...Of course, to various parties, Lewinsky was obviously -- albeit suspiciously -- orders of magnitude more-important than the poorly-covered by the news media (and very poorly-investigated by a Monica's-BJ-obsessed Republican Congress IMO...) Lippo/Chine$e scandal. And while I of course have no absolute proof of this, I said at the time it was almost as if both "major" parties had something to hide WRT China and money, and given subsequent events I stand by those suspicions today.
JMR
Ahhh, come on Tim... it just
March 25, 2007 - 15:12 ET by bigtimerAhhh, come on Tim... it just depends on the definition of scandal to the leftist talking heads speaking for the democratic arm of their party.
Agenda agenda agenda.
I remember the differences in the media well...they covered for the Clinton administration...let alone Clinton...ad nauseum.
I heard Ed Henry this morning on CNN saying the White House Press briefings always asked numerous tough questions about the Clinton scandals ect...that simply is not true...I caught most of them...I waited for any of them to ask important questions about the last criminal scandals when it came to the latest never-ending long line of them with the Clinton's...rarely were there any...every once in awhile one would pop up...
Btw...this was in reference to Tony Snow telling Henry to zip it (which I guess Snow apologized to him later...this was during the morning Gaggle, not televised)...which I wished Henry would, he is a despicable gnawing little reporter...a Gregory wanna be.
They are just absolute hypocrites.
Still doing it today...never ends with these obvious phony hypocrites.
press- sured
March 25, 2007 - 15:34 ET by the mad poleI still would like a in depth story on Sandy Berger. Man that story has everything any real journalist could launch a career on! Makes Watergate look like a jaywalking. Why doesn't a kid fresh out of school jump on it. I can't understand, how can they all be Kool-aid drinkers? Chaos or genetics or an act of God is long over due.
I remember tons of polls du
March 25, 2007 - 16:48 ET by gopsteveI remember tons of polls during the Starr investigation saying how people were seeing it as politcal.
What about the Libby investigation?...I never heard one poll.
In fact...when do we see polls suggesting the Dems are playing politics?
There have been plenty of pol
March 25, 2007 - 17:04 ET by Del DolemonteThere have been plenty of polls about the Libby probe, but of course, you're right-none of them have asked those being polled if they thought the probe was "political".
However, there is one encouraging sign-in the Gallup Poll done in mid March, the majority of Americans (55%) said that they had not been following the Libby story closely or at all.
http://www.pollingreport.com/whprobe.htm
steve,Great point!I forgot ab
March 25, 2007 - 17:47 ET by bigtimersteve,
Great point!
I forgot about all of those agenda driven polls....CNN leading the way ad nauseum!
Excuse me, but there is a 900
March 25, 2007 - 17:40 ET by SaseboSailorExcuse me, but there is a 900 lb. gorilla in the room that nobody - including the White House and all of it's defenders - has bothered to mention.
There is a previous attorney general - Janet Reno - who was no doubt picked personally by a certain woman now running for president. That attorney general presided over the burning alive of 90 men. women and children in the worst massacre of American citizens in the history of the country! Yet the lumbering lesbo finished her illustrious "career" with great approval from the likes of Chuckie Schumer and Pat Leahy.
Why o Why is everyone allowing the democrats to frame this phony non-issue? If they want to get down and dirty, lets do it! How many men, women and children has Alberto Gonzales burned up?? Sheesh!!
He who hesitates is last.
Ah, Sailor, but you forgot
March 25, 2007 - 20:15 ET by motherbeltAh, Sailor, but you forgot that Ms. Reno took "full responsibility" for the Waco massacre. I believe she said it was her decision (taking the rap and getting Clinton off the hook). Of course, for a Democrat, taking "full responsibility" is easy: you just say the words; there are no consequences. I don't think she ever even said she "regretted" the loss of lives.
Maybe Gonzales should follow her example; say "OK, I take responsibility for the firings. Now I am going to go about my business." Ya think???
Believe it or not Departmenth
March 25, 2007 - 22:43 ET by Del DolemonteBelieve it or not Department
http://www.wsws.org/articles/1999/sep1999/waco-s04.shtml
Great link Del...I cannot eve
March 25, 2007 - 22:50 ET by bigtimerGreat link Del...
I cannot even go back there at the momment, some days I can, some not.
I am still so infuriated with that whole situation and the trial later that I still slow burn with what these people got away with.
Got to get dinner and ready for a new day...
Later to all.
Great point!! (to those wh
March 26, 2007 - 03:21 ET by MBConservGreat point!! (to those who have seen the first Austin Powers, and to modify the hilarious insult to Margaret Thatcher) "Janet Reno naked on a cold day, Janet Reno naked on a cold day!!"
"Before I refuse to take your questions...I have a statement.." Ronald Reagan
The Deep Dark Secret
March 25, 2007 - 21:09 ET by JoelCTOk, let's look at this Firing "Scandal" at its absolute deepest, darkest worst.
Dick Cheney, Karl Rove, and even Donald Rumsfeld meet with Alberto Gonzales in a dark, windowless room beneath the White House. Each one hands Gonzales their choices. Cheney's list says, fire this guy because I hate him, this other guy because he's a weenie, and this lady because I don't like her hairstyle. Rove's list is three names of people who he thinks voted for Chuck Hagel. Rumsfeld has two names: A guy who once called him "Rummy" to his face, and another guy who washed out of the Navy. The three men offer no other reason to fire the prosecutors than what I have listed. Then they tell Alberto, "You fire these people or you'll be chasing ambulances in Laredo next week!" So, Gonzales fires them the next day.
Even if everything in the above tale were true, guess what? STILL NO LAWS WERE BROKEN. PERIOD.
The MSM just want someone else in the administration fired, so they can go on and on about the "lack of ethics" in the Bush administration. Oh, didn't they CROW when Rumsfeld resigned? What a party they must have thrown when Scooter was found guilty (for nothing)? How many blisters did they get from patting themselves on the back when Trent Lott stepped down (for nothing)?
These people want to hurt Republicans, and it doesn't matter how they do it, or what it takes to get there. They have no shame, they have no morals, and they have absolutely no conscience! Of course, they're Democrats, so I'm repeating myself.
Joel......but very much worth
March 25, 2007 - 21:35 ET by bigtimerJoel...
...but very much worth repeating!
Thank you for that well put...you said it all to a tee.... point!
You spoke volumes!
LOL! However, I suggest one s
March 25, 2007 - 22:33 ET by Del DolemonteLOL! However, I suggest one slight modification-
They meet in a dark, windowless room beneath Halliburton World Headquarters (soon to be moving to a friendly Middle Eastern country near you!)
What part of, "the att
March 26, 2007 - 03:39 ET by MBConservWhat part of, "the attorney's serve at the president's leisure" does the main stream media not understand? Being a minority and a Texan I am very proud of Alberto Gonzales (and to you liberals who are from the north, just because you think you are smarter than everyone else, does not give you the right to tell my race we can not make it on our own and that we need your help, with that I present to you my middle finger, I got my college degree on my own). I have embarked on a crusade to alert other Hispanics such as myself, that just because you have roots south of the border, does not make you a Democrat by default. Being a black sheep in my family, Thanksgiving dinner conversations are quite interesting.....but just because you drink coffee in New York with your pinky in the air, does not mean I care what your opinions are, so you can take your socialism and condescension and shove it!
All my life the left told me I was a Mexi-Can't, I proved I am a Mexi-Can, but first and foremost, I am an American!
"Before I refuse to take your questions...I have a statement.." Ronald Reagan
Six full months before Henr
March 25, 2007 - 23:20 ET by liberal_bug_zapperSix full months before Henry P. Wickham, Jr. wrote his piece on the American Thinker called "America's Neo-Copperheads", I wrote a piece on my blog called "Today’s Democrat Copperheads". Both pieces talk about the treasonous attitudes of the so-called 'peace movement'.
____________________________________________________
"We can only reason from what is; we can reason on actualities, but not on possibilities." ~ Thomas Paine