Wednesday, August 13, 2008

Follow Up On the Fray

In Sunday's LA Times, columnist Tim Rutten had the following editorial. It is pretty much what I wrote yesterday. He mentions a couple of possible reasons why the MSM failed miserably in its job, but I think there are probably more. Someday, I hope and pray that REAL journalists will look into all of the shenanigans of this Primary Season. Now to Mr. Rutten:

Old Media Dethroned
Edwards' admission signals the end of the era in which traditional media set the limits of acceptable political journalism.

Tim Rutten

August 9, 2008

When John Edwards admitted Friday that he lied about his affair with filmmaker Rielle Hunter, a former employee of his campaign, he may have ended his public life but he certainly ratified an end to the era in which traditional media set the agenda for national political journalism.

From the start, the Edwards scandal has belonged entirely to the alternative and new media. The tabloid National Enquirer has done all the significant reporting on it -- reporting that turns out to be largely correct -- and bloggers and online commentators have refused to let the story sputter into oblivion.

Slate's Mickey Kaus has been foremost among the latter, alternately analyzing and speculating on the Enquirer's reporting and ridiculing the mainstream media for a fastidiousness that has seemed, from the start, wholly absurd. Like other commentators, he repeatedly alleged that a double standard that favored Democrats applied to the story. Like the Enquirer's reporting, the special-treatment charge is largely true, as anyone who recalls the media frenzy over conservative commentator and former Cabinet secretary William Bennett's high-stakes gambling would agree.

Edwards, 55, now admits that he had an affair with Hunter, now 44,in 2006, but denies that he is the father of the child she had in February. Andrew Young, another former Edwards aide, has said he is the baby's father. In a statement released Friday, Edwards said he was willing to take a paternity test; doubtless we'll hear more on that issue.

So far, so sordid.

But what's really significant here is the cone of silence the nation's major newspapers -- including The Times -- and the cable and broadcast networks dropped over this story when it first appeared in the tabloid during the presidential primary campaign. Next, the Enquirer reported that the unmarried Hunter was pregnant. Still no mainstream media interest. Indeed, never in recent journalistic history have so many tough reporters so closely resembled sheep as those members of the campaign press corps who meekly accepted Edwards' categorical dismissal of the Enquirer's allegations. Late last month, Edwards came to Los Angeles, and Enquirer reporters trailed him to the Beverly Hilton hotel, where he met Hunter and her daughter in their room.

The Enquirer went with the story, and when no major newspaper or broadcast outlet even reported the existence of the tabloid story, bloggers and online commentators redoubled their demands that the mainstream media explain their silence. The tabloid followed with a story alleging payments of hush money to Hunter and, this week, with a photo of Edwards holding an infant in what appears to be a room at the Beverly Hilton. As pressure mounted on major newspapers to take some aspect of the unfolding scandal into account, editors and ombudsmen issued statements saying it would be unfair to publish anything until the Enquirer's stories had been "confirmed."

Well, there's confirming and then there's confirming. One sort occurs when an editor mutters, "Find somebody and have them make a few calls." Then there's the sort that comes when that editor summons an investigative reporter with a heart like ice and a mind like Torquemada's and says, "Follow this wherever it goes and peel this guy like an onion."

Suffice to say that the follow-up of the Enquirer's story fell into the former category in too many newsrooms, including that of The Times.

Some of this reticence may have reflected a regard for the feelings of Edwards' wife, Elizabeth, who has incurable cancer. There was, however, every reason to set that deference aside.

First, it was less than unlikely that Elizabeth Edwards was unaware of the allegations. (She says now she knew of the affair in 2006.) Second, Edwards' name has surfaced as a possible running mate for Barack Obama and as a possible attorney general or Supreme Court nominee -- posts in which character and candor matter. Finally, throughout his political career, Edwards has made his marriage a centerpiece of his campaigns.

It's interesting that what finally forced Edwards into telling the truth was a mainstream media organization. ABC News began investigating the Edwards affair in October, but really began to push after the Beverly Hilton allegations. When ABC confronted Edwards with its story (which confirmed "95% to 96%" of the tabloid's reporting, according to the network), he admitted his deception.

With that admission, the illusion that traditional print and broadcast news organizations can establish the limits of acceptable political journalism joined the passenger pigeon on the roster of extinct Americana.

timothy.rutten@latimes.com

6 comments:

GRL-InsightAnalytical said...

kenoshaMarge has her own things to say about the media....

The “Meaning” of America
http://insightanalytical.wordpress.com/2008/08/13/the-meaning-of-america/

“I do not want to play nice with bigots, liars and ignoramuses. I can get mean, nasty, insulting when confronted with idiocy. Mostly, why bother? I have better things to do with my time.”

Mostly about the media, but the above quote seems to apply to the DNC as well…

Rabble Rouser Reverend Amy said...

Great quote - thanks, Grl!

Mary Ellen said...

Hi Amy--I'm in such a hurry today, have to drive my son to college. Yikes! Anyway, an OT- I put a little plug for you and other PUMA's on my blog today. You guys are the best.

I'll be back later!

Rabble Rouser Reverend Amy said...

Hey, ME!

Thank you! That is so sweet of you! I appreciate it - especially as the lineup is coming out abt the speakers at the Convention. I'll be writing more on that soon.

Wow - that must be hard for you to drive your son to college. I know you've done it before, but isn't he the last one?

Tracie the Red said...

In the face of the Russia-Georgia situation - in the face of no end to the "war" in Iraq - in the face of a collapsing economy - people are worried about what Edwards does with his Mr. Happy?

Some of my coworkers the other day were standing outside smoking and discussing who was more famous: Hilary Duff or Lindsay Lohan. Um, hello, BOTH of them are useless bimbos! Yet this is what the ordinary American voter is worried about?

Maybe society DOES deserve to collapse in a heap of self-indulgence...

Rabble Rouser Reverend Amy said...

Tracie -

Thanks for the comment, but I think you missed the point. I said pretty clearly that choices John Edwards are his business, and ELizabeth's. It is when he attacks President Clinton for similar behavior, denies the truth, and makes statements regarding presidential behavior, which he, personally, has violated. It is an issue of CHARACTER, and that DOES mean something in terms of whoever is in the position of dealing with difficult issues like Georgia and Russia.

SO, I agree that too many Americans are far too focused on the lives of celebrities, and are treating this campaing like American Idol - I have stated that many times.

It's a big picture thing, not as simplistic as what he did with his equipment.