Journalism's Dirty Little Secret: Most Scoops Come from Partisans

Photo of Matthew Sheffield.
  • Bookmark and Share

Writing at Salon, Michael Scherer discloses one of journalism's dirty secrets: many of the biggest and most sensational stories you hear about in the media were not dug up by the reporters themselves. Instead, they were handed to them by political operatives from an opposing campaign. Oftentimes, the provenance of that information is never disclosed to the audience.

While he frames his article around Matt Drudge and his supposed control of Republican politics, Scherer's point is equally true of the MSM which is regularly handed scoops by liberal bureaucrats and Democratic officials.

John McCain's "Bomb Iran" scandal almost never happened.

The reporters covering the Murrells Inlet, S.C., rally last month, where McCain jokingly parodied the old Beach Boys song "Barbara Ann" with the words "Bomb Iran," didn't think the joke was news. Only one writer, Scott Harper, from the local Georgetown Times, mentioned it in his story, and he relegated it to the 17th paragraph. "I didn't think Jay Leno would be talking about it," he said.

Story Continues Below Ad ↓

The Associated Press reporter on-site ignored the joke altogether, and focused his story on McCain's pledge to brief the public about Iraq on a biweekly basis if elected president. The reporter for the Sun-News, a local Myrtle Beach newspaper, also led with the press conference pledge and left out the joke. But then someone -- we don't know who, exactly -- sent a carefully edited video of the joke to Matt Drudge, who runs the most popular news blog in America and the premier outlet for anonymous political leaks from Republican insiders.

The next day, the Drudge Report headline blared, "McCain Sings: 'Bomb Bomb Bomb, Bomb Bomb Iran.'" Hours later, the Associated Press echoed Drudge by sending a new story over the wire, headlined "McCain Jokes About Bombing." By then the news was everywhere. Leno, Jon Stewart, each major television network and the big newspapers eventually mentioned the clip. That afternoon, McCain was caught on defense at a campaign appearance in Las Vegas, telling reporters to "lighten up and get a life."

As news events go, the "Bomb Iran" episode was surprisingly typical for the 2008 campaign. It resulted from an anonymous leak, most likely from a rival campaign, rather than the shoe-leather reporting of independent journalists. It was, in the lingo of the campaign trail, an "oppo dump," apparently compiled with the help of one of the vast, secretive propaganda machines housed in each of the major campaigns. In recent months, such invisible releases of information have often dominated the news cycle and have become ubiquitous for reporters covering the candidates. Official e-mails from campaigns regularly arrive in reporter in boxes with subject lines like "n/a," or "not for attribution." Unsigned white papers are delivered with damning facts about opponents' fundraising reports. Information is passed along by senior campaign officials in hushed tones on the telephone, only after the reporter has sworn never to reveal the source.

Both reporters and the campaigns benefit from this thriving black market of information, as does the public, in many cases, because noteworthy facts about the candidates are widely disseminated. But the growing profusion of campaign-driven stories has also sidelined traditional on-the-ground journalism, while at the same time misleading the public about the true source of information. Though reporters, and blogs like the Drudge Report, take credit for scoops, the news of the day is more often than not produced by the invisible hand of one campaign or another. Journalists long ago learned how to play the game. "Reporters will often call and ask proactively, 'What kind of dirt do you have for me?'" said one senior official at a presidential campaign who asked not to be identified.

That last part is a little funny. An anonymous source denounces anonymous sources.

—Matthew Sheffield is the creator of NewsBusters and its Executive Editor.


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.

This reminds me of an inciden

This reminds me of an incident that happened to me. I once used the media, in a way. I’ve never looked at the media the same ever since.

In 1988, I was a Jesuit, studying for the priesthood. For a summer program, I joined a junket to Central America to support our Jesuits there. Part of the junket was a week in El Salvador. We stayed at the university in San Salvador, the capital. We met the Jesuits there, and they were wonderful to us. But a year later, in the middle of a civil war, the Salvadoran military invaded the Jesuit residence and massacred them. The atrocity was an international story.

I begged my provincial to let me do something. Because I knew the murdered Jesuits, they assigned me to be the ‘press liaison’ at a memorial service at Loyola College in Baltimore. The local TV ‘action news’ investigative reporter showed up, and he was right out of central casting. He had a trench coat. He had the perfect hair coif, and the resonant radio voice. At one point, he said to me, “terrible thing that happened to your friends, wasn’t it?” Well, it all poured out of me. I ranted for ten minutes. I explained every political, economic, and historical angle of this atrocity that I could think of. During my whole rant, he nodded his head, and mumbled, sure, yeah, right. In the back of my mind, I thought, I’ve convinced him. We’ll get the media on our side, and that will bring justice.

At the end of my rant, I stopped for a pause. The reporter said to me, “I have just one question.” I said, “What’s that?”

He said (I swear): “So where is El Salvador, I mean in relation to the United States?” (Yes, he meant where it is on the map, not how our diplomatic relations are. I had to ask him twice…)

Here’s the point. On the 11 o’clock news that night, he delivered his report. He basically repeated my rant, and delivered it as fact, even though I was his only source. While I was grateful for what he reported, I couldn’t help shake the truth that this lightweight framed the event for his audience on the 11 o’clock news … but three hours earlier, he didn’t know where El Salvador was. I’ve been cynical about the media ever since.

many of the biggest and most

many of the biggest and most sensational stories you hear about in the media were not dug up by the reporters themselves.

Says it all for me anymore....there is absolutely no gum shoe work by journalists or reporters....it is and has been despicable for years now.

All just agenda driven.

Period.

Hence the protection of &quot

Hence the protection of "sources."

Modern Journalist

The most important tool of the modern journalist "Starbucks Coffee". Just sit back in your chair, sift through the press releases from public relations firms, or politicians press secretaries and bingo -- news.

Investigative work is simple. Wait for the op-research crew of a candidate, a political hack or disgruntled worker to call you with a story. Multiple sources? Whats that? 

If it fits the template - go with it.