home

What's Wrong With Media: Halperin/Harris Edition

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Media
Posted on Wed Oct 04, 2006 at 06:21:46 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

(Guest Post from Big Tent Democrat)

No, Mark Halperin, ABC Political Director, and John Harris, Washington Post Political Editor, did no Shorenstein Center teeth gnashing, hair pulling review of the media in their book "The Way To Win" (How To Succeed as Media Without Trying") (Ok my subtitle is a joke for those who may be confused). Indeed, that's the problem. As Eric Boehlert reports, instead they wrote a "What's Wrong With the Democrats" book. And that tells you what's wrong with the Media:

Among the most important of Halperin and Harris's take-away tips -- their so-called "Trade Secret" -- is for candidates seeking the White House in 2008 to basically not act like Democrats. Specifically, Halperin and Harris stress that recent campaigns by Gore and Kerry failed because they lost control of their public image via the press, in sharp contrast to Bush's campaigns, which, thanks to the hard work of Karl Rove, were able to control their public image. What Halperin and Harris absolutely refuse to acknowledge is the willing role the press played in those key Democratic setbacks and the media's shrieking double standard that's been on display for the last decade.

Boehlert's piece is terrific, read the whole thing. But the crux of the matter is this:

The irony is thick but nonetheless completely lost on Halperin and Harris; their slanted, lazy restating of the Swift Boat story is precisely the kind of reporting that helped doom the Kerry campaign.

Now the inappropriateness of political reporters doing a "how to" book for politics escapes Halperin and Harris. And Boehlert is implicit in his criticsim of what they do write, but I think does not emphasize enough how the very act of writing this book is the biggest symptom of all. They are political consultants, not reporters. They discuss how politicans should deal with them! Amazing.

But my advice is different from Halperin's and Harris' - I recommend Democrats demonize the Media for its GOP enabling ways. And guess who I learned that trick from? Why the Republicans of course. I call it the GOP Media dog whistle. Scream at the Media's "bias" and insure good coverage. I bet that part didn't make it into the Halperin/Harris politician self help book. No need to wonder why.

< "Heck of a job, Dennie" | Walking and Chewing Gum at the Same Time >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    What's Wrong With Media: Halperin/Harris Edition | 7 comments (7 topical)
    Re: What's Wrong With Media: Halperin/Harris Edit (none / 0) (#1)
    by Sailor on Wed Oct 04, 2006 at 07:25:24 AM EST
    The media is saying that they can pick the next pres ... but only if they like him. Media consolidation is killing this country.

    Re: What's Wrong With Media: Halperin/Harris Edit (none / 0) (#2)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Oct 04, 2006 at 07:39:41 AM EST
    The media double standard has been around for longer than the last decade. I first noticed it during the 1980 presidential election between Carter and that slimy embarrassment Reagan, whom the press idolized and kept referring to as The Great Communicator, while insisting that Carter was a failure.

    Re: What's Wrong With Media: Halperin/Harris Edit (none / 0) (#3)
    by orionATL on Wed Oct 04, 2006 at 12:46:25 PM EST
    yes i agree that democratic politicians should attack the media and for good reason - the media these days, in terms of practical effects as opposed to their "fairness" rhetoric, most often represents only one side of most political contests - the republican side. i wondered from the beginning of kerry's campaign why kerry did not persistently attack the media when it erred or was unfair, having seen what the press (nyt's kit selye, et al) did to gore. but now, late 2006, i would go way beyond mere campaign denouncements of media bias. if the democrats win either house of congress, i would like to see two congressional investigations take place as the very first of the investigations the democrats might conduct: 1. an investigation under oath as to the reasons why the major corporate media have been unbalanced in their coverage of political news. rather than reporters, this would focus especially on the decisions made by corporate and media executives, editors and producers. fox news, which is simply a republican cable news company, would be an appropriate place to start, but executives, editors, and producers of the washington post and new york times, nbc, cbs, abc, cnn, newsweek and time magazine, AND THEIR PARENT CORPORATIONS should all be called to testify under oath as to why they made the news managing decisions they made. i would bet anything there is a gigantic political payola scandal waiting to be uncovered - perhaps with favors to the corporate parents of the news outlets. the presentation of news has just been way to one-sided for too long for it to be mere chance at work. 2. an investigation under oath as to why dozens of americans have been harassed or arrested by police or other security types while protesting or speaking out at appearances of president bush and vice-president cheney in the last six years. the bullying, harassment, intimidation of political opponents of the pres and v-p is the worst i can ever recall. as with #1 above, i cannot believe this is happening by accident. it has got to be a white house policy decision and it is most likely aimed at preventing any appearance of disagreement with the president or vice-president's policies or decision.

    Re: What's Wrong With Media: Halperin/Harris Edit (none / 0) (#4)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Oct 04, 2006 at 03:19:15 PM EST
    Working w the Press-- it's hard to bite the hand that feeds you. I worked press during the McGovern Campaign (of blessed memory), and followed the dance between press officers and the media. You WANT (really really want) the media to love you and your candidate. So you're tempted (very very tempted) to give them that little extra bit of info, and to help them get the story they want. But then, when they screw your candidate, there's nothing to be done. If you scream, then they probably won't cover your next story at all (unless you're a Republican). If you push back, offering more information, more details -- then there's no liklihood that the reporter (or editor) will include anything you've put forth (or that they won't distort it completely). It's outrageously naive for these 'reporters' to infer that it's the Democrats' fault that the press covers them so badly. And interesting that the Republicans' cries of a biased 'liberal' press get picked up so widely, and the Democrats' charges of a biased 'conservative' press are distorted or ignored.

    Re: What's Wrong With Media: Halperin/Harris Edit (none / 0) (#5)
    by aw on Wed Oct 04, 2006 at 07:14:47 PM EST
    I first noticed it during the 1980 presidential election between Carter and that slimy embarrassment Reagan, whom the press idolized and kept referring to as The Great Communicator, while insisting that Carter was a failure.
    You and me both. It was so obvious a change that I remember asking at the time, "What's going on with the press?" They were so gleeful about the Reagan's characterization of the Carters as Ma and Pa Kettle. I thought it was very disrepectful and beneath the both Reagans and the press.

    Re: What's Wrong With Media: Halperin/Harris Edit (none / 0) (#6)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Oct 05, 2006 at 07:47:28 AM EST
    DavidD **Breaking News** Carter was a failure. You comment shows that even reality can't change your point of veiw. Carter was a horrible president and Reagan stomped him becasue most of the country new it. If you're going to take shots at Reagan use good Democratic presidents...JFK, Clinton...to compare Reagan too. Carter was horrible and anyone could have beat him because he stunk up the Whitehouse. As for the double standard I gues you could call it that when the media doesn't "always" come down on the side of the far left wing of the democratic party. I guess you're right occasionally they just put forth the centrist democratic point of veiw and that is too much for the "looney left". Conservatives can only chuckle when they hear democrats or liberals complain about the media. That's like Isreal complaining about not getting enough military aide from the U.S. I guess a spoiled child never thinks they get enough help from their parents either.

    Re: What's Wrong With Media: Halperin/Harris Edit (none / 0) (#7)
    by Slado on Thu Oct 05, 2006 at 07:47:28 AM EST
    DavidD **Breaking News** Carter was a failure. You comment shows that even reality can't change your point of veiw. Carter was a horrible president and Reagan stomped him becasue most of the country new it. If you're going to take shots at Reagan use good Democratic presidents...JFK, Clinton...to compare Reagan too. Carter was horrible and anyone could have beat him because he stunk up the Whitehouse. As for the double standard I gues you could call it that when the media doesn't "always" come down on the side of the far left wing of the democratic party. I guess you're right occasionally they just put forth the centrist democratic point of veiw and that is too much for the "looney left". Conservatives can only chuckle when they hear democrats or liberals complain about the media. That's like Isreal complaining about not getting enough military aide from the U.S. I guess a spoiled child never thinks they get enough help from their parents either.

    What's Wrong With Media: Halperin/Harris Edition | 7 comments (7 topical)